IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 21.10.2011 CWP No. 17084 of 2011 Khem Chand Sharma ...Petitioner Versus Bank of India and ors ….Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SANDHAWALIA Present: Mr. Akshay Bhan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. G.S. Anand, Advocate for Caveator-respondent. Mr. Jagmohan Bansal, Advocate for respondent No. 2. HEMANT GUPTA, J. Challenge in the present petition is to an order passed by Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, Chandigarh (for short ‘DRT, Chandigarh) dated 14.12.2010 whereby an application filed for interim relief for not putting the residential house of the petitioner to auction was declined and challenge is also to the order in appeal passed by Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Delhi (for short DRAT, Delhi) dated 30.8.2011 (Anneuxre P-14), whereby the said order passed by the DRT, Chandigarh was affirmed. The petitioner is a borrower of the respondent-Bank and has defaulted in making payment for availing the financial assistance from the Bank. The petitioner mortgaged his residential House bearing No. 1511, Sector 34-D, Chandigarh measuring 528.13 sq yards comprising of three constructed floors to secure the loan availed by him. The said property was sought to be put to sale in terms of the provisions of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest CWP No. 17084 of 2011 Act, 2002 (for short the ‘SRFAESI Act’). Earlier the petitioner filed a writ petition before this Court which was dismissed on 17.9.2010 with the liberty to the petitioner to impugn the action taken under the SRFAESI Act. Thereafter, the petitioner filed the petition under Section 17 of the SRFAESI Act along with an application for interim relief which was declined by DRT, Chandigarh on 14.12.2010 (Anneuxre P-12). The said order was affirmed in appeal DRAT, Delhi on 30.8.2011 (Annexure P-14). The mortgaged property was put to auction on 15.12.2010. The respondent No. 2 was found to be the highest bidder who has offered to purchase the property in the sum of Rs. 4.51 crores. In terms of the conditions of the auction proceedings, the said respondent deposited Rs. 18.00 lacs. The said amount is lying as Fixed Deposit with the Bank. The order passed by DRT, Chandigarh dated 14.12.2010 and DRAT, Delhi dated 30.8.2011 were challenged by the petitioner before this Court in the present writ petition. The writ petition came up for hearing on 14.9.2011 when the petitioner made a statement that the entire dues of the Bank which are to the tune of Rs. 97.00 lacs shall be settled within three weeks. In pursuance of the said statement, learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the entire due amount stands deposited except Rs. 1,47,582/-. The said fact is admitted by Shri Anand, learned counsel for the Bank that the said amount is due in respect of all the loan accounts of the Petitioner. In view of the said fact, when the entire amount stands paid, we find that sale of property by auction in the sum of Rs. 4.51 Crores is not justified. The auction purchaser has deposited only meager sum of Rs. 18 Lacs. Therefore, the order passed by DRT, Chandigarh dated CWP No. 17084 of 2011 14.12.2010 and DRAT, Delhi dated 30.8.2011 are set aside. Petitioner is given three weeks time to deposit a sum of Rs. 1,47,582/-. On such deposit being made, the DRT, Chandigarh shall decide the petition under Section 17 of the SRFAESI Act according to law. Since, respondent No. 2 has deposited Rs. 18 lacs on 15.12.2010 and the said amount is lying as Fixed Deposit with the Bank, the interest of auction purchaser is sufficiently protected but to meet the cost of proceedings, we order that the petitioner shall pay another Rs. 50,000/- as the costs within three weeks before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. The amount deposited by respondent No. 2 be refunded to it with interest as also the costs of proceedings. The writ Petition is Disposed of in above terms. (HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE 21.10.2011 (G.S. SANDHAWALIA) preeti JUDGE