Bombay High Court: SARFAESI auction purchasers can use writ petitions to enforce Section 14 possession orders
· Reported by LiveLaw Biz
The Bombay High Court held that auction purchasers under the SARFAESI Act have standing to file writ petitions directly enforcing a District Magistrate's Section 14 possession order, ruling that denying them this remedy would be a 'travesty of justice' when the borrower simply refuses to comply. The court ordered the Tahsildar to hand over physical possession of the property to auction purchaser Jasraj Restaurants Pvt. Ltd., who had held a registered sale certificate since 2021 but remained without possession for years.
What this changes for a title check
This closes a real practical gap for anyone who has bought property at a SARFAESI auction: a registered sale certificate alone does not guarantee physical possession if the borrower keeps resisting, and this judgment confirms the auction purchaser, not just the bank, can directly petition the High Court to force the Magistrate's own possession order to be carried out, rather than being stuck waiting on the bank or DRT to act. For title diligence on any SARFAESI-auctioned property, a five-year gap between the sale certificate and actual possession, as happened here, should be treated as a known risk pattern rather than an unusual one.
For a lawyer advising a client buying at or after a SARFAESI auction, this ruling is a useful precedent to have on file: if a Section 14 possession order exists but is not being executed, the purchaser has an independent writ remedy rather than depending entirely on the secured creditor to chase enforcement. It also confirms the earlier ITC Hotels Supreme Court ruling does not bar an auction purchaser's own standing to seek this relief, which removes a defence borrowers had been raising to resist these petitions.