Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 188302 (ALL)

M/S SHRAYA PROPERTY DEALERS AND TRADERS v. CHIEF MANAGER AUTHORIZED OFFICER THROUGH ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AND ANOTHER

WRIC/1018/2025 · 2025-02-13

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:21691-DB Court No. - 39 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 1018 of 2025 Petitioner :- M/S Shraya Property Dealers And Traders Respondent :- Chief Manager Authorized Officer Through Its Regional Office And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajan Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- Ashok Kumar Pandey Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma,J. Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri K.M. Asthana, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Bank. 2. This writ petition has been filed for the following relief: (i) a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents bank to accept the remaining outstanding amount from the petitioner for loaned property in question and further be pleased to restrain the respondents bank from taking physical possession over the property in question. (ii) Issue any other writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem, just and proper in the circumstances of the case. 3. Sri K.M. Asthana, learned counsel appearing for the respondent- Bank has submitted that the property in question was sold on 19.10.2023 itself by way of auction after the proceedings were initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act. Learned counsel appearing for the Bank states that the facts with regard to the sale etc. had been concealed by the petitioner and the sale has not been disclosed in the writ petition and fraudulently the order dated 16.01.2025 was obtained by the petitioner. 4. We from the instructions find that the property in question in fact has already been sold in auction. With regard to the sale, certificate has also been issued on 19.10.2023. We, thus, consider it appropriate not to interfere in the matter. 5. We are, however, restraining ourselves from passing any order with regard to the payment of cost to the Bank. 6. The writ petition is accordingly, dismissed. 7. The Bank Draft, which petitioner had provided to the learned counsel for the Bank who had earlier appeared in the case, be returned to the petitioner personally by the Branch Manager by way of a Bank Draft. Order Date :- 14.2.2025 M.S. Ansari (Dr. Y.K. Srivastava,J.) (Siddhartha Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD SAQIB ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad