Allahabad High Court
PAWAN AGARWALversusSTATE OF UP AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The petition is disposed by permitting the petitioner to make a representation before the bank and directing the bank to pass orders, without deciding the merits of the fraud or refund claims.
Summary
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking quashing of a sale notice and auction of a property by Union Bank of India, a refund of Rs.1,53,73,440 deposited by him, restraint on forfeiture of that amount, production of title and auction records, and compensation for alleged fraud. The petition also requested mandamus directing the bank to take various actions. The court, after hearing arguments, limited the relief to allowing the petitioner to make a representation before the bank's branch manager and directed the bank to pass appropriate orders within seven days, without adjudicating the substantive claims regarding fraud, refund, or compensation. No decision was taken on the amount already deposited. The petition was therefore disposed with directions for further representation.
Issues considered
- Whether the sale notice and auction conducted by the bank were fraudulent and liable to be quashed.
- Whether the bank is obligated to refund the amount deposited by the petitioner under the auction proceedings.
- Whether mandamus can be issued to compel the bank to produce title and auction records and to restrain forfeiture of the deposited amount.
- Whether the writ petition is maintainable for the reliefs sought.
Subjects
- writ petition
- certiorari
- mandamus
- bank auction
- fraud
- property sale
- representation
- High Court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 38716 of 2026
Pawan Agarwal
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of Up And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Abhinav Gaur, Shreya Trivedi
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Ashish Agrawal, C.S.C.
Court No. - 5
HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.
HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J.
1. The petitioner has preferred present writ petition inter-alia with the
following prayers :-
"I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the sale notice
dated 08.07.2026 and the consequential auction proceedings/sale conducted by the
respondent-Bank on 28.07.2026 in respect of the property admeasuring 4,880 square
metres situated in Khasra No. 1788, Mauza Chhata, Tehsil Chhata, District Mathura,
in favour of the petitioner as the same is perpetuated by fraud;
II. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the
respondent-Bank to refund to the petitioner the entire amount of Rs.1,53,73,440/-
deposited by him pursuant to the aforesaid auction proceedings, together with interest
thereon from the respective dates of deposit till the date of actual refund;
III. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus restraining the
respondent-Bank from forfeiting, appropriating or otherwise retaining any part of the
amount deposited by the petitioner pursuant to the auction proceedings dated
28.07.2026;
IV. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the
respondent-Bank to produce before this Hon'ble Court the complete title, mortgage,
security and auction records relating to the property in question, including the title
search report, title verification report, legal scrutiny report/legal opinion, valuation
report, encumbrance/search report, chain of title documents, original title deeds, pre-
WRIC No. 38716 of 2026
2
auction inspection report, internal approval/auction file and all other documents
relied upon for determining and offering the area of 4,880 square metres for auction;
V. issue a writ, order or direction directing the respondent-Bank to pay suitable
compensation/damages to the petitioner for the monetary loss, inconvenience,
harassment and litigation expenses occasioned to him on account of the aforesaid
acts, omissions, suppression and failure to disclose material facts concerning the title
and extent of the property."
2. After some arguments counsel for the petitioner confined his prayer
and prayed to permit the petitioner to represent the matter before the
respondent no.3-Branch Manager, Union Bank of India, SAM Branch,
Delhi, which has not been opposed by Sri Sandeep Arora, learned counsel
for the respondent no.3.
3. In this view of the matter, present writ petition is disposed of
permitting the petitioner to submit a representation before the respondent
no.3 within three days from today. If it is so, the respondent no.3 is
directed to pass appropriate orders on the same within next seven days.
4. Till then no decision be taken by the respondent-bank regarding the
amount which has already been deposited by the petitioner pursuant to the
auction notice dated 08.07.2026.
(Vivek Saran,J.) (Prakash Padia,J.)
September 24, 2026
Pramod Tripathi
Digitally signed by :-
PRAMOD TRIPATHI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…