Bombay High Court
Thane Bharat Sahakari Bank LtdversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court held that the amicable settlement recorded in the Minutes of Order is binding, and accordingly ordered the sale, adjustment of proceeds, closure of the loan account and disposal of the writ petition.
Summary
The petition filed by Thane Bharat Sahakari Bank Ltd., a secured creditor, sought court directions to obtain physical possession of a secured immovable property. During the pendency of the writ petition, the parties reached an amicable settlement whereby the bank agreed to sell the property to Pradnya Niketan Education Society (Respondent No.7) for Rs 9.75 crore, and the auction purchaser (Respondent No.8) would be refunded Rs 9.57 crore. The settlement was recorded in a Minutes of Order detailing the sale, adjustment of proceeds under the SARFAESI Act, closure of the borrower’s loan account, and various undertakings by Respondent No.8, including withdrawal of claims and consent to the sale. The Court accepted the Minutes of Order, directed the bank to issue the sale certificate, close the loan account, and issue a No‑Dues Certificate, and disposed of the writ petition. The State authorities’ involvement became irrelevant after the settlement.
Issues considered
- Whether the Court can enforce the parties’ amicable settlement concerning the sale of a secured asset under the SARFAESI Act.
- Whether the bank may adjust the sale proceeds to settle the borrower’s loan and close the account.
- Whether the State authorities’ role is necessary after the settlement of the dispute.
Legislation cited
- Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 — s. 41-D
- Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 — s. 13(2), sale certificate provisions
Subjects
- SARFAESI Act
- secured loan
- sale of secured asset
- amicable settlement
- loan closure
- No Dues Certificate
- Maharashtra Public Trusts Act
- property dispute
- court order
- settlement enforcement
Judgment
1
6-wp-6465-2025.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 6465 OF 2025
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 10645 OF 2025
Thane Bharat Sahakari Bank Limited and Anr. …Petitioners
Versus
State of Maharashtra and Others …Respondents
VISHAL
SUBHASH
PAREKAR Mr. Charles D’Souza a/w. Mr. Nikhil Rajani i/b. V. Deshpande & Co. for
Digitally signed by
VISHAL SUBHASH
PAREKAR
the Petitioners
Date: 2026.09.21
18:48:26 +0530 Mr. P.P. Kakade, Addl.G.P. a/w. Smt. V.S. Nimbalkar, AGP for
Respondents No. 1 to 5.
Mr. Suyash Gade a/w. Mr. D.S. Sarangdhar i/b. Ms. Sunitha Nayak, for
Respondent No. 6.
Mr. Apsi Chinoy, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Kamlesh Ghumre and Ms.
Sonali Jadhav, for Respondent No. 7.
Mr. Anil Anturkar, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Abhishek Thoke, for
Respondent No. 8.
Ms. Anita Castellino a/w. Ms. Aruna Castellino, for the Applicant in IA
No. 10645 of 2025.
Mr. Pankaj Birwadkar, Authorised Signatory of the Petitioner is present
Mr. Subarao Patil, President of Respondent No. 7 and Mr. Malikneer,
Secretary of Respondent No. 7 present.
Mr. Vikram Gaikwad, the Respondent No. 8 present.
******
CORAM : MANISH PITALE AND
SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, JJ.
DATE : 21st SEPTEMBER, 2026
P.C. :
1. The learned Counsel for the parties inform this Court that an
amicable settlement has been reached with regard to the issues arising
in the present Writ Petition.
Vishal Parekar ….1
2
6-wp-6465-2025.doc
2. Although the Writ Petition was being pursued by the Petitioner
No. 1 Bank (Secured Creditor) for directions to the Respondent State
authorities to give assistance for taking physical possession of the
secured asset, with passage of time and during pendency of the
petition before this Court, an amicable settlement has been reached,
whereby the petition itself can be disposed of to the satisfaction of the
contesting parties.
3. It is to be noted that Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 are State
authorities, and since the dispute is now settled between the Petitioner
Bank (Secured Creditor) on the one hand and Respondent Nos. 7 and
8 on the other hand, the role of the State authorities is no longer
significant. It was only if directions were to be issued for taking
physical possession of the secured asset that the role of the State
authorities would have been prominent.
4. After much deliberation, the Petitioners, being the Bank and its
Authorized Officer, as also Respondent No. 7 (Trust- Society running a
school in the subject property) and Respondent No. 8 (the Auction
Purchaser), have signed Minutes of Order. These Minutes of Order
record the details of the amicable settlement and as to the manner in
which Respondent No. 6 (Borrower) would be discharged of its
Vishal Parekar ….2
3
6-wp-6465-2025.doc
liability in respect of the loan account, which was declared as a Non-
Performing Asset by the Petitioner No. 1 Bank. The Minutes of Order
are taken on record. The Minutes of Order read as follows:
MINUTES OF ORDER
The Petitioners and Respondent Nos. 7 and 8 have arrived at an
amicable settlement concerning the secured immovable property
described in Exhibit “A” to the Petition (“the subject property”).
Accordingly, with the consent of the parties concerned, order in terms
of the following is sought to be passed:
1. The sale of the Petitioner’s secured assets as described in
Exhibit “A” to the Petition stand confirmed in favour of the
Respondent No. 7 for total consideration amount of Rs. 9,75,00,000/-
(Rupees Nine Crores Seventy-Five Lakhs Only) and said consideration
amount has been deposited by Respondent No. 7 with the Petitioner
which are lying in the “No Lien Account (Interest Free)” with the
Petitioner.
2. Since the entire amount of Rs. 9.75 Crores (including legal
expenses) has been paid by Respondent No. 7 to the Petitioner and the
Petitioner does not have any other claim against the Respondent No. 7
of any nature whatsoever, the Respondent No. 7 shall remain the sole
custodian of the property described in Exhibit “A” to the Petition in
perpetuity.
3. The Petitioner shall be entitled to appropriate and adjust the
aforesaid entire sale proceeds amount deposited by the Respondent
No. 7 towards its entire claim against the Respondent No. 6 as claimed
in 13(2) Notice dated 15.06.2022 issued under SARFAESI Act, 2002.
4. The Petitioner shall issue and register Sale Certificate for sale
of the subject property as described in Exhibit “A” to the Petition in
favour of the Respondent No. 7 under provisions of SARFAESI Act,
2002 within 02 working days from the date of compliance of the
present Order passed by this Hon’ble Court and Respondent no. 7
shall bear necessary stamp duty, registration fees and incidental
expenses pertaining to registration of aforesaid Sale Certificate.
5. The Petitioner shall close the loan account of the Respondent
Vishal Parekar ….3
4
6-wp-6465-2025.doc
No. 6 in its books of account and Respondent No. 6 and all its
Guarantors and mortgagors shall stand discharge from their liability
towards the Petitioner and the Petitioner shall issue its Loan
Settlement Letter to Respondent no. 6.
6. Admittedly, an amount of Rs. 9.57 crores has been deposited
by Respondent No. 8 with the Petitioner which are lying in the “No
Lien Account (Interest Free)” with the Petitioner which the Petitioner
shall refund to the Respondent No. 8 on following day i.e. 22.09.2026,
upon passing of the present Order by this Hon’ble Court and against
the receipt of which the Respondent No. 8 shall cease to have claim of
any nature whatsoever against the Petitioner and or the subject
property as described in Exhibit “A” to the Petition. Simultaneously,
Petitioner No. 1 shall be entitled to appropriate and adjust the entire
amount of Rs. 9,75,00,000/- (Rupees Nine Crores Seventy-Five Lakhs
Only), deposited by Respondent No. 7, Pradnya Niketan Education
Society, towards full and final settlement of its claims against
Respondent No. 6 and confirmation of the sale of the subject property
in favour of Respondent No. 7.
7. Respondent No. 8, Mr. Vikram Gaikwad, hereby
unconditionally and irrevocably withdraws, relinquishes and waives all
his existing and future rights, claims and demands arising out of or
relating to the Agreement for Sale dated 8 April 2025 and the subject
property described in Exhibit “A” to the Petition. Respondent No. 8
confirms that he shall not, either now or at any time in the future,
claim any compensation, interest, damages, costs, reimbursement or
any other amount whatsoever from the Petitioners, Respondent No. 7 -
Pradnya Niketan Education Society, or any person claiming through or
under them. Respondent No. 8 further undertakes not to initiate,
maintain or support any proceeding, objection or claim concerning the
sale, transfer or possession of the subject property in favour of
Respondent No. 7 before any Court, Tribunal or authority.
8. Respondent No. 8, Mr. Vikram Gaikwad, hereby gives his
free, unconditional and irrevocable consent to the sale and transfer of
the subject property by Petitioner No. 1, Thane Bharat Sahakari Bank
Ltd., in favour of Respondent No. 7, Pradnya Niketan Education
Society.
9. Respondent No. 8 shall have no right, title, interest or claim
of any nature whatsoever against Petitioner No. 1, Respondent No. 7
Vishal Parekar ….4
5
6-wp-6465-2025.doc
or the subject property. Respondent No. 8 shall not obstruct, challenge
or dispute the sale, possession, issuance or registration of the Sale
Certificate in favour of Respondent No. 7 before any Court, Tribunal
or statutory authority.
10. If required Respondent No. 8 shall execute all consent
affidavits, declarations, undertakings, withdrawal applications and
other documents reasonably required for giving full effect to these
Minutes of Order and for completing the transfer and registration of
the subject property in favour of Respondent No. 7.
11. Until the date of this Order, Respondent No. 7 shall be
deemed to have held the subject property as custodian or agent of
Petitioner No. 1. Upon passing this Order and confirmation of the sale,
such custodial arrangement shall stand terminated, and the possession
of Respondent No. 7 shall thereafter be in its own right as the
successful purchaser of the subject property.
12. In consideration of the consent and undertakings given by
Respondent No. 8 and subject to full compliance with these Consent
Terms, Respondent No. 7 agrees to take the necessary steps to
withdraw the proceeding/application instituted under Section 41-D of
the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950, against Mr. Venkatrao
Gaikwad, father of Respondent No. 8.
13. The withdrawal contemplated under the preceding clause
shall be affected by filing an appropriate application before the learned
Joint Charity Commissioner, Pune, after:
(a) the Sale Certificate is issued and registered in favour of
Respdt. No. 7;
(b) possession of the subject property is formally confirmed in
favour of Respondent No. 7;
(c) Respondent No. 8 complies with all his obligations and
undertakings under these Consent Terms.
14. It is agreed that upon passing of the present Order by the
Hon’ble Court, the Petitioner and Respondent no. 7 shall withdraw the
following pending litigations filed by them against each other and
against Respondent No. 8 pertaining to subject property before Civil
Court, Pune and Debt Recovery Tribunal, Pune or any other
competent Court / Authority / Tribunal:
Vishal Parekar ….5
6
6-wp-6465-2025.doc
Sr. Particulars Court / Tribunal
Special Civil Suit No. 798 of 2025
Jt. Civil Judge and Addl
Pradnya Niketan Education Society
1. Chief Judicial
Vs
Magistrate Pune
Thane Bharat Sahakari Bank Ltd and Ors.,
Special Civil Suit No. 1963 of 2023
Jt. Civil Judge and Addl
Pradnya Niketan Education Society
2. Chief Judicial
Vs
Magistrate Pune
Thane Bharat Sahakari Bank Ltd and Ors.,
Case No. 1494 of 2023
Thane Bharat Sahakari Bank Ltd Deputy Registrar Co-
3.
Vs Operative Societies
Vidya Vardhini Developers Pvt., Ltd & Ors.,
Securitization Application No. 2509 of 2025
Debts Recovery
Pradnya Niketan Education Society
4. Tribunal Pune
Vs
Thane Bharat Sahakari Bank Ltd And Ors.,
Civil Revision Application No. 57 of 2026
Thane Bharat Sahakari Bank Ltd and Ors., Bombay High Court
5.
Vs
Pradnya Niketan Education Society
41D Application No MA34 of 2025
Joint Chairty
Subarao Balaram Patil
6. Commissioner office,
Vs
Pune
Mr. Venkatrao Gaikwad
15. It is agreed that the present Order passed by this Hon’ble
Court, Respondent no. 6 and 8 shall not have any claim or raise any
dispute of whatsoever nature against the Petitioner pertaining to sale of
subject property to Respondent no. 7 before any competent Court /
Authority / Tribunal.
16. Respondent No. 6, Vidya Vardhini Developers Pvt. Ltd., has
already granted its consent and no objection to the sale of the subject
property, first in favour of Respondent No. 7, Pradnya Niketan Education
Society and Respondent No. 8, Mr. Vikram Venkatrao Gaikwad.
Respondent No. 6 has no subsisting right, title, interest, claim or
objection concerning the sale and transfer of the subject property in
favour of Respondent No. 7. Upon appropriation of the entire sale
Vishal Parekar ….6
7
6-wp-6465-2025.doc
consideration by Petitioner No. 1, the loan account of Respondent No. 6
shall stand fully and finally settled and closed, and Respondent No. 6,
together with all its guarantors and mortgagors, shall stand discharged
from their respective liabilities. In view of the prior consent and no
objection already granted by Respondent No. 6 and the full and final
settlement of its loan account, no further consent, approval,
confirmation, execution or signature of Respondent No. 6 shall be
necessary for the acceptance, implementation or enforcement of these
Minutes of order, or for the issuance and registration of the Sale
Certificate in favour of R- No. 7.
17. The statements and undertakings contained in these Minutes
of order are accepted as undertakings given to this Hon’ble Court. Any
breach thereof shall entitle the affected party to seek appropriate
directions and enforcement from this Hon’ble Court.
18. The present Minutes of order have been read and explained to
the parties concerned in a language understood by them. The parties
confirm that they have executed the same voluntarily, after obtaining
independent legal advice and without force, coercion or undue influence.
EXHIBIT “A” TO THE PETITION
(Referred to as the "the Subject Property")
ALL THAT piece and parcel of the immovable property comprising:
Auditorium "Rangmanch" admeasuring approximately 4,500 Sq. Ft.;
Basement Parking admeasuring approximately 18,547.33 Sq. Ft.;
Top Terrace Canteen above Fourth Floor admeasuring approximately
9,983 Sq. Ft.;
situated on and forming part of the property bearing Survey No. 80,
Hissa No. 1/2 and 2/2, Village Baner, Near Signet Corner, Taluka
Haveli, District Pune – 411045, within the local limits of the Pune
Municipal Corporation and within the jurisdiction of the Sub-Registrar,
Haveli, District Pune.
5. We are of the opinion that a perusal of the Minutes of Order
signed by the parties, who are present in Court today and are
represented by their respective Counsel, effectively bring to a close the
Vishal Parekar ….7
8
6-wp-6465-2025.doc
controversy between the parties.
6. The parties to the Minutes of Order signed and presented today
before this Court are directed to abide by their respective
undertakings and obligations as per the said signed Minutes of Order
quoted hereinabove.
7. In the light of paragraphs 5, 15, and 16 of the above-quoted
Minutes of Order, since Respondent No. 6 (Borrower) is recorded to
have been discharged of its liability, and since the Petitioner Bank
intends to close the loan account, the contents of paragraphs 5, 15,
and 16 are made an order of this Court.
8. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner Bank submits that within
15 days of the requirements recorded under the Minutes of Order
being satisfied, the loan account of Respondent No. 6 shall be closed
and a No Dues Certificate shall be issued to Respondent No. 6.
9. In view of the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of.
10. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, J.) (MANISH PITALE, J.)
Vishal Parekar ….8
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.