Civil Writ Petition No.12961 of 2011 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.12961 of 2011 Date of decision: 28.11.2011 P.K.Bansal ...Petitioner Versus Haryana Financial Corporation ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.S.SANDHAWALIA Present: Mr. Sanjiv Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Kamal Sehgal, Advocate for the respondent. **** HEMANT GUPTA, J. The petitioner is the intending purchaser of the property of M/s Shanker Lal & sons mortgaged in favour of the respondent-Corporation. It is pointed out by the petitioner that earlier respondent-Corporation has put to sale the said property vide advertisements dated 11.12.2009, 25.6.2010, 26.8.2010 and 13.12.2010. In all such processes, the petitioner was highest bidder but sale has not been confirmed in his favour. Now the respondent-Corporation has again issued notice for auction vide advertisement Annexure P-15 inviting intending bidders to participate in open auction on 25.7.2011 with reserve price of Rs.65 lacs. The grievance of the petitioner is that repeated actions of the respondent-Corporation in putting the property to sale against the recovery of Rs.18 lacs is arbitrary, unjust and unfair. In reply, it has been pointed out that earlier, borrower has filed a writ petition before this Court challenging the advertisement for auction on 26.8.2010. This Court directed the respondent-Corporation to fix Civil Writ Petition No.12961 of 2011 -2- **** minimum reserve price as Rs.52.10 lacs. In pursuance of the said direction sale was fixed to be conducted vide auction notice dated 13.12.2010. The respondent-Corporation received a bid through courier from Shri Sanjay Kumar and Sh. Parveen Kumar in the sum of Rs.65 lacs along with earnest money of Rs.6.5 lacs. The bid was not opened during the auction proceedings but after conclusion of auction proceedings, the principal borrower has written a letter sponsoring the bid of Rs.65 lacs. Therefore, it has been decided by the respondent-Corporation to re-auction the property. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and find no merit in the present petition. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that total amount is Rs.18 lacs whereas property put to auction with reserve price of Rs.65 lacs is not tenable. The Corporation is making attempt to obtain maximum price of the property. It cannot be said that the repeated steps taken by the Corporation are in any manner prejudicial to the interest of the borrower. The petitioner who is intending purchaser does not have any locus standi to dispute the auction proceedings. We, therefore, find no merit in the instant writ petition. It is dismissed with no order as to costs. However, it is open to the petitioner to take refund of the amount of earnest money deposited by him. As and when any such request is made, the respondent-Corporation shall refund the amount of earnest money with accrued interest on it. (HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE November 28, 2011 (G.S.SANDHAWALIA) Pka JUDGE