Equivalent Citations

2022 SCC ONLINE PAT 2787 .

Gauri Fertilizer Store, Through Its Proprietor Sri. Ravi Kumar

Petitioner/s v. Uco Bank, A Govt. Of India Undertaking Through Its
Managing Director And Ceo Uco Bank And Others /s.
Patna High Court (Sep 28, 2022)

CASE NO.

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 19602 of 2021

DISPOSITION

dismissed

JUDGES

Sanjay Karol, C.J.

S. Kumar, J.

JUDGMENT

Sanjay Karol, C.J.:— Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:—
(i) That for issuance of appropriate writ order or direction or writ in the nature of
mandamus or declaration that the Law requires primacy of the right of the mortgager to
redemption under Section 60 of the Transfer of Property Act & the Petitioner made
considerable payment of over 24 Lakhs after receipt of Ref No. ZOBE/ REC/
BR/2020-2021/119 dated 08.01.21 issued Under Section 13(4) SERFAESI Act & read with
Rule 8 of the Security interest (Enforcement) Rules 2002 & sought time of 12 Months to
clear the entire debt & has cleared entire debt by today & deposited the amount by Toady
within aforesaid 12 Months as such prays for issuance of appropriate writ order or
direction or writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent not to dispossess the
Petitioner from the mortgaged property i.e. single House of the Petitioner.
(ii) That for issuance of appropriate writ order or direction or writ in the nature of
mandamus or declaration that the Auction sale is vitiated not only because there is Single
Bidder & valuable house of the Petitioner was e-auctioned without any Competitive price
but due to fraud & collusion with the auction purchaser who have grossly undervalued the
property & hurriedly sold the single house of the Petitioner to single bidder & without any
competition & in no Case the House of the Petitioner which has got Market Value of more

Printed by licensee : Shipra Gurha Page 1 of 4

than 2.5 Crores can be auctioned in 48 Lakhs simply because the Petitioner had obtained
business loan which was repaid with interest by today, As such a writ of mandamus be
issued commanding the respondent that the auction sale is vitiated due to the fact that (A)
The Petitioner made huge payment of over 24 Lakhs during the Course of Korona
Pandemic after receipt of Notice under Section 13(4) of the SERFAESI Act when the
business was shut down in entire nation (B) By application dated 31.03.21 & 16.08.21 the
Petitioner specifically submitted that he is ready to repay the amount within 12 months &
actually repaid the entire amount with interest (C) due to fraud & collusion between the
Branch Manager, Chief Manager & auction purchaser Price of the House was grossly
undervalued from their Market rate (D) The Petitioner has single house to survive (D) The
petitioner has cleared & Wright off entire dues within the aforesaid 12 Months time as
such a declaration be issued that the conspicuous Auction sale made by the Respondent by
secret deal between the Branch Manager, Chief Manager & the single bidder cum auction
purchaser cannot sustain in the eye of Law as such the same is vitiated & required to be set
aside.
(iii) That for issuance of appropriate writ order or direction or writ in the nature of
mandamus commanding the Respondents not to dispossess the Petitioner from his House
until decision of mstant writ application & further permit the petitioner to be in possession
of the subject property since the respondent entered into fraud & collusion with the auction
purchaser & hurriedly auctioned the Mortgaged property on 31.08.21 or on subsequent
date not known to the Petitioner since the Petitioner was not given any Notice after Ref
No. ZOBE/ REC/ BR/2021-2022/115 Dated 09.08.21 despite payment of over 24 Lakhs
made by the petitioner after receipt of Notice under Section 13(4) SERFAESI Act & until
today the Petitioner has cleared entire debt to the respondent Bank as such the respondent
be directed not to create any third party right, interest, lien etc. regarding the single House
of the Petitioner.
(iv) That for issuance of appropriate writ order or direction or writ in the nature of
mandamus by way of declaration that the respondents acted like property dealers &
Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the Case of Ram Kishun v. State of UP (2012) 11 SCC
511 Poignantly observed thus 13 Undoubtedly, public money should be recovered &
recovery should be made expeditiously but it does not mean that the financial institutions
which are concerned only with the recovery of their loans, may be permitted like property
dealers & be permitted further to dispose of the secured assets in any unreasonable or
arbitrary manner in flagrant violation of the statutory provisions”
(Emphasis supplied).
As such whether under the given factual position when the petitioner had deposited over
50% amount & brought the Account below the Cash Credit amount allowed to the
Petitioner & there was worldwide Korona pandemic as such the Respondent ought to have
not entered into Auction sale & (A) ought to have permitted the Petitioner to avail Cash
Credit facility under the allowed limit or (B) ought to have allowed 12 months time to pay
back the entire debt but the respondent hurriedly auctioned the House of the Petitioner on

Printed by licensee : Shipra Gurha Page 2 of 4

base price to single bidder & brought the Petitioner on road when the petitioner was ready
to deposit the entire amount which is deposited by know & within the sought period as
such whether the entire action sale made in favor of respondent is vitiated.
(v) That for issuance of appropriate writ order or direction or writ in the nature of
mandamus commanding the respondents that the Auction dated 31.08.2021 is vitiated
since the Property was sold to Single bidder due to illegal rash dealing of officers of the
Bank & the further the Bank illegally denied the petitioner an opportunity to discharge
their liability within a Fixed period of 12 months despite an representation made under
Rule-3A to Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules 2002 inserted by SO 103(E) Dated
02.02.2007 applicable with effect from 02.02.2007 & the respondent chooses not to return
any reply to representation made under Rule-3A to Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules
2002 when the Petitioner had sought 12 Months time by his application dated 31.03.21 &
16.08.21 as such a declaration be issued commanding the respondent that the symbolic
Possession to Secured assets by the Authorized Officer is not in accordance with the
provisions of the SERFAESI Act & Rule-3A of Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules
2002 due to their arbitrary exercise of power & apparent violation of principles of natural
Justice.
(vi) That for issuance of appropriate writ order or direction or writ in the nature of
mandamus or declaration that the Possession of Secured assets by the Authorized Officer
to the respondent Bank is not in accordance with the provisions of Rule-9 of Security
Interest (Enforcement) Rules 2002 since the Property of the Petitioner was put on sale by
letter No. ZOBE/REC/BR/2021-2022/115 Dated 09.08.21 without following the Statutory
Period of 30 days while the Petitioner was making Payments & had paid altogether Rs.
24,07,170 (Rupees Twenty Four Lakhs Seven thousands one hundred Seventy) & the bank
was dealing with the Property dealer with ignorance & negligence to the right of the
Petitioner guaranteed under Article 300A of Constitution of India read with Section 60 of
Transfer of Property Act. As such the intentional ignorance of fact despite representation
made under Rule 3A to Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules 2002 vitiates the auction
sale made in favor third party.
(vii) That for issuance of appropriate writ order or direction or writ in the nature of
mandamus commanding the respondents prohibiting them to transfer only residential
House of the Petitioner in favor of any third party since the Respondent has cleared the
entire legitimate dues of the Bank & the Bank is required to reverse (I) renewal Charges
debited by Bank after NPA when the Petitioner was not able to use their Cash Credit
Facility (2) to reverse the interest realized after NPA (3) To reverse Rs. 1,45,984/deducted
illegally from the Account of the Petitioner in the name of illegal e-auction which ought to
have not happened in given circumstances when (A) the petitioner deposited over 24
Lakhs & (B) WHEN THE Petitioner by his Application dated 31.08.21 & 16.08.21 sought
12 months time As such direction by given to reverse the amount as aforesaid.
(viii) That For issuance of appropriate writ order or direction or writ in the nature of
Mandamus Commanding the respondent Bank & restraining them from transferring the

Printed by licensee : Shipra Gurha Page 3 of 4

Residential House property in favor of any third party & further restraining them to create
any third party interest with regards to residential house of the Petitioner & further fining
the respondent to deliver Physical possession to any third party by dispossession of
Petitioner from his Residential Hose Bearing Khata No. 24 & 25, Survey Plot No. 3807,
3802 (old), 6019, 6020, 6100 (New) under Thana No. 190, Touzi No. 3762, Situated at
Mouja Nariyar Area 02 Katha 8.734 Decimal.
(ix) That for issuance of appropriate writ order or direction or writ in the nature of
Mandamus Commanding the Respondent Bank to repay the illegally deducted amount
along with the interest since an amount of Rs. 1,45,984/ deducted illegally from the
Account of the Petitioner including the Cash Credit Facility Charge of Rs. 20,000/which
was illegally deducted while foe Account was declared NPA as such direction may be
given to the respondent to return Rs. 1,45,984/along with interest.
(x) That for grant of any other relief or relief's to which the petitioner be found entitled in
law especially all along Cost of legal proceeding right from the DRT to Hon'ble High
Court & Cost in terms of mental & physical harassment be granted to the Petitioner.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this petition.
4. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of as withdrawn.
5. Interlocutory applications), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

Printed by licensee : Shipra Gurha Page 4 of 4