AKSHAY BANSAL Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Chetan Chatterjee, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner; Sri Ashok Shankar Bhatnagar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.2 and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of State.

(2.) This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioner is aggrieved by the alleged illegal auction proceedings, possession and issuance of wrong sale certificate.

(3.) The facts of the case are that the bank took physical possession of the property on February 7, 2025 from the borrower, and thereafter, handed over the property to the auction purchaser on February 11, 2025. However, from the advertisement of auction and the subsequent sale certificate provided to the auction purchaser, it is clear that the description of the property sold in auction was not correct. It appears from the facts that the borrower had purchased another piece of land and constructed a building on the property mortgaged as well as the property purchased subsequently by the borrowers.