AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J
Heard, learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner is the borrower and the instant Writ Petition has been filed for quashing of the sale notice for the mortgaged property dated 17.06.2025 under Rule 8(6) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rule, 2002 to hold public e-auction which was scheduled to be held on 09.07.2025 and a further, prayer has been made to restrain the Respondents- Bank to proceed any further with the public e-auction.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that he is willing and ready to settle the issue and ready to deposit the amount to the Respondent(s)- Bank within 90 days, therefore, prayer is made to restrain the Respondents- Bank to proceed any further in the matter.
Learned counsel for the Respondents- Bank while opposing the prayer has submitted that the process of e-auction has been completed and confirmation of sale has been made in favour of the purchaser on 09.07.2025. It is submitted that in view of the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in (2024) 2 SCC 1 [Celir LLP vs. Bafna Motors (Mumbai) (P) Ltd.] wherein, it has been held that the Writ Petition will not be maintainable after the confirmation of the sale by the Bank. As per the amended provisions of 13(8) of the SARFAESI Act, right of the borrower to redeem the secured asset stands extinguished thereunder, on the very date of publication of the notice for public auction under Rule 9(1) of the 2002 Rules.
In view of the above proposition of law as enunciated by Hon’ble the Supreme Court, there is no scope of interference by this Court at this stage.
The instant Writ Petition being devoid of any merit stands dismissed. Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of. However, the petitioner will have liberty to move before the appropriate forum.