ATUL MODI Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in the present writ petition is to a communication dated 03.09.2014 (Annexure P-12) calling upon the petitioner, an auction purchaser, to pay all statutory dues and any other dues on the property, expenses relating to stamp duty, Registration Charges, Conveyance, Lawyer's Fees etc. as per the conditions of the auction notice. The grievance of the petitioner is that the demand of amount of enhanced compensation was not disclosed in the auction notice, therefore, the same cannot be claimed from the petitioner.

(2.) The petitioner relies upon a communication dated 22.04.2011 (Annexure P-6) addressed by Haryana State Industrial & Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited (for short 'HSIIDC') to the borrower in support of the contention that on failure to disclose the amount of enhanced compensation, the Bank is not competent to claim the same from the petitioner. The relevant clauses from the communication dated 22.04.2011 reads as under:-

(3.) In the auction notice (Annexure P-1), the property was put to auction on "As is where is basis" and "As is what is basis". The relevant terms and conditions from the auction notice reads as under:-