Libertatem Magazine

Gujarat High Court Directs Respondent Bank To Not Proceed With E-Auction Sale of Petitioner’s Secured Assets, in View of the Outstanding Amount Being Paid by the Petitioners

Contents of this Page


The present petition had been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India to pray for reliefs like the Respondent bank be directed to accept the settlement proposal as made by the petitioners in a letter dated 03.03.2021; quash and set aside an e-auction sale notice dated 04.03.2021 issued by the Respondent bank and be pleased to put a stay on the e-auction sale notice dated 04.03.2021 issued by the Respondent bank in newspapers, scheduling e-auction of the secured assets of petitioners on 22.03.2021 and also provide any other such relief, order or direction which the Hon’ble Court may deem to be just, proper and equitable in the present case’s facts.

Submissions before the Court

Petitioner’s Submissions

The learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the petitioners had referred to the averments which were made in the memo of the present petition. He had moreover, submitted that the petitioners were willing to pay an outstanding amount to the Respondent Bank in certain installments. He after being instructed by his briefing Advocate Mr. Nirmal Fofani, had submitted that the total outstanding amount as of 17.03.2021 was Rs.7,62,50,141/ and the petitioners would pay such amount with an interest at the rate of 10.60% p.a.

Learned Senior Advocate had further submitted that an undertaking would be given by all of the partners, guarantors, and mortgagors to the Respondent Bank, and in case of default in payment of any of the installment, the whole amount would fall due immediately and the Respondent Bank would be entitled to proceed for sale of the mortgaged properties under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. It was, henceforth, urged that appropriate and proper directions be issued.

Respondent’s Submissions

The learned Senior Advocate Mr. R.S. Sanjanwala assisted by the learned advocate Mr. Anip A. Gandhi appearing for the Respondent Bank had submitted that an amount of Rs.7,62,50,141/ was outstanding as of 17.03.2021. Therefore, the Court must reject the proposal as given by the petitioners.

Consideration by Court

The Court considered the submissions made by the learned Senior Advocates appearing for the respective parties, perused the material placed on record, and further considered the willingness which was shown by the petitioners before this Court.

In the present facts and circumstances, where the petitioners were willing to pay the entire outstanding amount with an interest at the contractual rate of 10.60%p.a. and moreover, had shown willingness to pay a reasonable amount of cost, thus this Court was inclined to consider the present case of the petitioners.

Court’s Directions

In view of the above, the Court had issued directions that the petitioners shall pay in total, the outstanding amount of Rs.7,62,50,141/ in instalments as per a given schedule and also pay interest at the rate of 10.60% per annum.

It was directed that the petitioners must pay an amount of Rs.1,50,00,000/ on or before 30.03.2021. The remaining amount of Rs.6,12,50,141/ must also be paid with interest and legal expenses be paid in six monthly instalments on or before the 30th of every month. The petitioners shall further, pay the remaining amount of Rs.1,12,50,141/ with interest on, or before, 30.09.2021. They must also pay the legal expenses of Rs.3,00,000/ to the Respondent Bank.

Moreover, the partners, guarantors, and mortgagors shall file an Undertaking before the Respondent Bank to the effect that the aforesaid amount will be paid as per a said schedule and in case of any default in payment of instalments, it would be open for the Respondent Bank to proceed further in regard to the sale of the mortgaged properties under SARFAESI Act

The possession of the secured property of the petitioners would be handed over along with a “No Dues Certificate” to the petitioners and a release of charge on receipt of the total payment and the petitioners must not transfer, mortgage, or create any third-party rights. However, the property shall remain in the possession of the Respondent Bank until full payment of the outstanding amount would be received. S.A. no. 25 of 2021, as filed by the petitioners before the Debts Recovery Tribunal at Ahmedabad must be withdrawn unconditionally by them.

With the aforesaid directions, the present petition stood disposed of. Accordingly, an e-auction Sale Notice dated 04.03.2021 issued by the Respondent Bank scheduling the e-auction of the Secured assets of the petitioners on 23.03.2021, was set aside and the respondent Bank was directed not to proceed with the e-auction sale.


Click here to read the judgment. is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgment from courts. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

About the Author