WPA/23285/2026 of SMT. TANIMA KUNDU KARMAKAR Vs THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK AND ANR. on 21 September 2026

1. Affidavit-of-service filed in court today is taken on record.

2. The present writ petition has been filed praying for the following relief: “A direction upon the Respondent to hand over the physical possession of the subject property otherwise to return the EMD of Rs.35,00,000/- deposited at the time of e-auction of the property with interest till date.”

3. Mr. Dan, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner participated in an auction process initiated by the Authorized Officer of the Punjab National Bank (in short, “the bank”), pursuant to a sale notice dated 4th September, 2024 issued in respect of the secured asset detailed in paragraph 3 of the writ petition. Having emerged as the successful bidder, the petitioner deposited the entire bid amount of Rs. 35,00,000/- with the bank within the period stipulated in the sale notice, and the bank also confirmed the sale. Subsequently, the bank issued a sale certificate in favour of the petitioner. However, physical possession of the property has not yet been handed over to the petitioner. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the petitioner has been compelled to prefer this writ petition, praying for a direction upon the bank to hand over possession of the property in question.

4. Mr. Dan further submits that the petitioner deposited the entire bid amount in the year 2024. Therefore, having regard to the inconvenience caused to the petitioner, an appropriate order be passed upon the bank to take effective steps for handing over possession of the property in question to the petitioner.

5. Mr. Banerjee, learned Advocate appearing for the bank, submits that the bank is keen and ready to hand over possession of the property in question to the auction purchaser. However, the borrower has filed an application under Section 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short, “the SARFAESI Act”), before the learned Debts Recovery Tribunal (in short, “DRT”). He further submits that the petitioner has been made a party respondent in the said proceeding and that the learned Tribunal has passed an interim order staying the operation of the order passed by the District Magistrate under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act. According to him, for these reasons, the bank was not able to hand over physical possession of the property in question to the petitioner.

6. In response, Mr. Dan submits that, under such circumstances, the DRT may be directed to dispose of the application as expeditiously as possible.

7. Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties and perused the materials on record.

8. Undisputedly, an application has been preferred by the borrower under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, which is pending before the DRT. On the basis of the said application, a proceeding has been initiated, which is presently pending for final adjudication before the learned Tribunal.

9. In view thereof, the petitioner is at liberty to file an appropriate application seeking expeditious disposal of the proceeding pending before the learned Tribunal. It is expected that, if such application is preferred by the petitioner, the proceeding shall be brought to its logical conclusion as expeditiously as possible, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

10. With these observations and directions, WPA 23285 of 2026 is disposed of.

11. Since no affidavits have been filed by the respondents, the allegations made in the writ petition shall be deemed to have not been admitted by the respondents.

12. There shall be no order as to costs.

13. Let urgent Photostat certified copy of this order be made available to the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of usual formalities.

(Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.)