Bombay High Court
PRAJAKTA PROPERTIES PVT LTD THROU. PRADIP INDULKAR AND ANRversusSTATE BANK OF INDIA THROU. AUTHORISED OFFICER AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The petitioner must be joined as a party in the pending DRAT appeal and interim applications, and the interim order stays subject to his participation.
Summary
The petitioners, Prajakta Properties Pvt Ltd and Pradip Indulkar, were the successful bidders in an auction conducted by the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Pune. An interim order dated 12 June 2026 was passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT), Mumbai, staying the confirmation of the sale in favour of the petitioners, without making them parties to the DRAT proceedings. The petitioners contended that the borrowers, who were already identified as "fence‑sitters" by the DRT, could not obtain such relief without being joined as parties. The High Court held that, since the order was interlocutory and the DRAT proceedings were ongoing, the petitioners must be joined as parties to the regular appeal and any interim applications therein. Accordingly, the court directed the borrower to join the petitioners within two weeks and ordered the DRAT to expedite the matter, while keeping all rights and contentions open.
Issues considered
- Whether an interim order staying the confirmation of an auction sale can be passed by the DRAT without joining the successful auction purchaser as a party.
- Whether the petitioner should be made a party to the pending DRAT appeal and interim applications.
Subjects
- writ petition
- interim order
- Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal
- auction purchaser
- joining as party
- stay of sale
- civil appellate jurisdiction
- Debt Recovery Tribunal
Judgment
varsha 6-wp-10436-2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 10436 OF 2026
Prajakta Properties Pvt Ltd Throu. .. Petitioners
Pradip Indulkar And Anr
V/S.
State Bank of India Throu. .. Respondents
Authorised Officer And Ors
-------------------
Mr. Charles Desouza (VC)with Rupak Sawangikar i/by Indrajeet
Hingane, for the petitioners.
Mr. Rony Pallath Joseph (Rony and Co), for respondent No. 1-State
Bank of India.
Digitally
--------------------
signed by
VARSHA
VARSHA DEEPAK
DEEPAK GAIKWAD
GAIKWAD Date:
2026.08.21
CORAM : MANISH PITALE &
14:55:25
+0530
SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, JJ.
DATE : 21ST AUGUST 2026.
PC:
1. The petitioner is the successful bidder/auction purchaser, and he
is aggrieved by an order dated 12th June 2026 passed by the Debt
Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (DRAT), passed in an interim
application filed in a regular appeal preferred by Respondent No. 2
(borrower). We are informed that Respondent No. 3, i.e. the co-
borrower, has expired.
2. The grievance of the petitioner is that although he is the
successful bidder/auction purchaser in an auction sale proceeding
conducted by the Recovery Officer of the Debt Recovery Tribunal,
Pune, without making him a party before the DRAT, an interim order
1 of 3
varsha 6-wp-10436-2026.doc
has been obtained by the said borrowers to the effect that there shall
be a stay to the confirmation of sale in favour of the petitioner.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the borrowers
were all along aware about the proceedings before the DRT and that
the DRT in its order has specifically recorded that they were 'fence-
sitters' who chose to approach the DRT after the matter had proceeded
to the stage of the auction sale being conducted. It is further submitted
that in such a situation, the DRAT ought not to have passed the interim
order in favor of the borrowers without the petitioners even being
made a party.
4. We are of the opinion that since the order impugned in this writ
petition is an ad-interim order, and the proceedings are still pending
before the DRAT, it would be appropriate that the petitioner is directed
to be joined as a party in the said proceedings. Since the outcome of
the said proceedings and any orders passed therein by the DRAT would
affect the petitioner, who is the successful bidder/auction purchaser, it
would be appropriate that a suitable direction is issued and the
proceedings before the DRAT are expedited.
5. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of by directing
Respondent No. 2 (borrower) to join the petitioners as parties in the
pending Regular Appeal No. 46 of 2026, and in the interim
applications filed therein.
6. The necessary amendments in the said proceedings before the
DRAT shall be carried out within two weeks from today.
7. Thereupon, the petitioners would be at liberty to participate in
2 of 3
varsha 6-wp-10436-2026.doc
the said proceedings and seek appropriate orders, including for
vacating the interim order passed by the DRAT. If such applications are
filed and pursued by the petitioners, they shall be decided on their own
merits by the DRAT. If the petitioners file applications as indicated
hereinabove for appropriate reliefs, the DRAT shall decide such
application(s) as expeditiously as possible, and within six weeks of the
petitioners being joined as parties to the proceedings.
8. All rights and contentions of the parties are kept open. The writ
petition is disposed of. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed
of.
(SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, J.) (MANISH PITALE, J.)
3 of 3
Checking your session…