srinivas (CA final Student) 05 November 2008
Dr. Gyanendra Kumar (Advocate) 09 November 2008
Mr. X may invoke Article 226 of the Constitution of India by filing Writ against the Bank
TVD Rajkumar (Advocate) 12 December 2008
I doubt Writ is an option at all..
Off hand it can be said you could avail remedy of specific performance (civil suit) & compensation OR simply for refund of the sale consideration & damages, intt etc..
But there's more to it.
What exactly are the so called documents which are not available with the Bank essential for transferring the title in your name?
Have you received the Certificate of Sale as provided in Appendix V of the Rules (see Rule 9 (6))
If the Bank did not show you all the documents, it should have put in caution and you ought to have made independent verifications of the property...
It is also possible to work on consumer angle.
Y V Vishweshwar Rao (Advocate ) 30 March 2009
I refer to the Section 17 ( 1 ) of the Securatization and Reconstruction of Finanacial Assets and Enforcement of Security interest Act 2002( For Short Security ACT ) .The Proeprty is sodl by the Authorised Officer of Secured Creditor unde the Act under a Notice for sale with a clause with encumbrances known to the Credot .The Sale cosnideration is paid by Mr X , . The Bank is aware of the all transactions by the Borrower with the bank in the loan Account, the same were to be mentioned in the Sale Notice . The Bank Authorised Officer sold the Property by entering in to the shoes of the Mortgaogr ,all the rights and liabilities of the Vendor & Purchaser are applicable to the Sale, if not otherwise agreed . It is mentioned in the query that all the facts were not disclosed to the Purchaser beofpre the Sale .
For all the above reasosn MR X has a remedy uder Section 17(1) of the Act to appeal before the concerned DRT and seek required directions agains the Bank for hsi redressal .
I hope this will solve the problem of Mr X - purchaser in the Auction sale Under the Security Act 2002