MR ANCKUR V MITTAL vs BANK OF BARODA GENERAL MANAGER (PRINCIPAL NODAL OFFICER) & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~49 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 7th January, 2025 + W.P.(C) 28/2025 & CM APPL. 68/2025 MR ANCKUR V MITTAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Vikram Singh Panwar with Mr. Abhimanyu Singh and Mr. Neeraj Maurya, Advocates. versus BANK OF BARODA GENERAL MANAGER (PRINCIPAL NODAL OFFICER) & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Santosh Kumar Rout, SC with Ms. D. Veragi, Mr. B N Mishra, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Respondent Bank had initiated auction/sale proceedings under Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). 2. The property in question was a residential property situated at Khasra No. 652, Khata No. 147, VII Kheda Pargana & Tehsil Dadri, Dist. Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh. 3. The petitioner participated in the above said e-auction and was found to be the highest bidder. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 28/2025 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:08.01.2025 11:37:28 4. As per the terms of the bid document, the petitioner deposited 25% of the bid amount on 28.06.2023. Such amount was of Rs. 44,25,000/- 5. Petitioner was also required to deposit the balance amount in a time-bound manner. 6. Fact remains that he could not do so and sent request to the bank to extend the time. 7. Admittedly such time, on the basis of the request made by the petitioner himself, was extended upto 20.09.2023. Fact remains, since the balance amount was not paid despite extension, the above amount of Rs. 44,25,000/- was forfeited as per the terms and conditions of the auction/sale proceedings. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner highlights that there is a subsequent huge development in the matter as the bank has entered into one time