#Auction Purchaser

The Delhi High Court held that a SARFAESI auction sale becomes final upon full payment within the Rule 9(4) period, extinguishing the borrower's redemption right irrespective of pending sale certificate registration before the DRT. The ruling secures auction purchasers' rights and clarifies that procedural delays in registration cannot reopen redemption.

The Bombay High Court held that purchasers of assets auctioned under the SARFAESI Act have locus standi to file a writ petition for possession, directing state authorities to enforce the magistrate’s order. The decision empowers auction buyers to obtain physical possession directly, without relying on the secured creditor’s enforcement.

Bombay High Court held auction purchasers under IBC are liable for property tax only from the sale certificate date, not prior periods. This protects purchasers from pre-CIRP municipal dues and ensures municipal corporations cannot demand historical tax from new owners.

The Kerala High Court has ruled that a sale certificate issued under the SARFAESI Act does not attract stamp duty when issued, as it merely evidences title already transferred by auction confirmation. Stamp duty is payable only when the certificate is presented for registration, relieving auction purchasers of premature financial burdens and aligning procedural compliance with substantive rights.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that an auction purchaser who deposits the full sale amount is a necessary party entitled to be heard before objections by a secured creditor can set aside the sale. The Court held that violating this principle of natural justice vitiates the order, ensuring procedural fairness in execution proceedings.

Bombay HC rules that initiation of IBC proceedings after issuance of a sale certificate under the Securitisation Act cannot invoke moratorium to stall possession by auction purchasers. The court condemns chronic defaulters' misuse of IBC to delay enforcement, affirming secured creditors' and purchasers' rights to proceed with asset takeover.

MP High Court holds banks accountable for auction deposits when sale certificates are delayed due to DRT inaction, ordering a full refund with 6% interest. The ruling reinforces auction purchaser rights under the SARFAESI Act and sets a precedent for bank liability in procedural failures.

Telangana High Court holds that Sub-Registrars are statutorily bound under Section 35 of the Registration Act, 1908, to record Debt Recovery Tribunal sale certificates in Book-I. Failure to do so violates auction purchasers' constitutional rights under Articles 14 and 21, as it deprives them of public notice and title protection. The ruling mandates compliance with registration formalities even for court-ordered auction sales to ensure transparency and legal certainty.