#Auction Purchaser Rights

The court ruled that a secured creditor in a SARFAESI auction must disclose known material encumbrances like unearned increase (UEI) charges, holding that an 'as is where is' clause does not override this statutory duty. Indian Bank was directed to pay UEI charges for four auctioned plots, with conveyance deeds to follow within four weeks. The ruling safeguards auction purchasers from hidden liabilities and mandates transparency in distressed asset sales.

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.

Bombay High Court rules that auction purchasers of flats in cooperative housing societies must clear past maintenance dues before admission as members under Section 154B-7 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act.

Rajasthan High Court holds that failure to deposit 25% of the bid amount on the auction date under SARFAESI Act extinguishes the auction purchaser's rights, even if amended Section 13(8) applies. The ruling underscores strict compliance with deposit timelines in secured asset auctions, impacting lenders, borrowers, and bidders.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that once an appeal under the SARFAESI Act is infructuous, the DRAT loses all jurisdiction to entertain or decide collateral disputes over auctioned properties. This clarifies that appellate tribunals cannot expand their scope to protect defaulting borrowers after the core dispute is moot, safeguarding auction purchasers' rights and preventing procedural abuse.

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.