2020 (10) TMI 1373

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... spondent Bank in cancelling the sale and forfeiture of the amount deposited - HELD THAT:- From the material on record it is established that it is the petitioner who having not deposited the 75% of the auction sale within stipulated time, has to blame herself. The circular of the Reserve Bank of India relied by the petitioner in paragraph 6.7 of the petition is of no assistance to the petitioner, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... formance Asset. The respondent Bank proceeded to auction the same under Section 13 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 and the Rules made thereunder. The petitioner being successful highest bidder was required to deposit the remaining 75% of the bid within the time stipulated in the auction notice. The petitioner despite the r .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... h is not denied by the petitioner. 4. In view whereof, we do not perceive any illegality in the impugned communication as would warrant any indulgence. 5. As regard to challenge to fresh auction notice, the Bank being a secured creditor and the property in question being a secured asset and since there is no accrual of right in the property in favour of the petitioner, the impugned auction n .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X