JYOTIRMAY BHATTACHARYA,J. - (1.) This Mandamus Appeal is directed against an order passed by the learned Single Judge on 4th December, 2014 in WP No. 1125 at the instance of the Respondent Bank. By the impugned order, the respondent bank was directed to refund the sum of Rs.1,21,00,000/- to the writ petitioner which the writ petitioner paid to the bank as the sale price of the property in question put on auction sale by the Bank to recover the dues of the borrower in exercise of the powers under the SARFAESI Act, 2002, within seven days from the date of the order together with interest at the rate of 12% per annum on and from the date of receipt of the purchase price until full payment thereof to the writ petitioner. The respondent bank was directed to pay costs of Rs.25,000/- to the writ petitioner.
(2.) Let us now consider the legality of the impugned order in the facts of the instant case. To realise the unpaid dues of its debtor, the respondent bank put up an immovable property belonging to its debtor for sale in auction under the provision of SARFESI Act, 2002. Pursuant to an advertisement published in the newspaper on 14.08.2011, the writ petitioner offered its bid and the writ petitioner being the highest bidder, was allowed to put in the bid money amounting to Rs.1,21,00,000/- which was accepted by the bank on 20.09.2011. Sale certificate was also issued in favour of the writ petitioner on 29th October 2011. However for some reason or other, the sale could neither be completed by registering the sale certificate, nor possession of the property-in- question could be delivered by the bank to the writ petitioner till date.
(3.) It is rightly pointed out by Mr. Saha, learned Senior counsel appearing for the bank that the writ petitioner did not pray for refund of the money deposited by it with the bank . In fact the writ petitioner prayed for delivery of physical possession of the property in question by the bank to the petitioner.;