Irfan Nisar Ahmed Khatri v. Uco Bank Asset Management Branch And ORS
8_WP_15177_25.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 15177 OF 2025 Irfan Nisar Ahmed Khatri ...
Petitioner vs.
UCO Bank, Asset Management Branch and others ... Respondents Mr. Sidharth Samantray a/w. Mr. Niket Harit, i/b. Manoj Harit & Co. for petitioner.
Adv Hafeezur Rahman for respondent Nos.1 and 2-bank. Ms. Tanu N. Bhatia, AGP for respondent No.3-State. CORAM : MANISH PITALE & SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, JJ DATE :
28th JANUARY, 2026 P.C. :
.
When the petition is called out for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although admittedly, the petitioner could not abide by the requirement of depositing the balance amount, as the lone successful bidder in the auction sale conducted on 23.07.2025, the petitioner is ready with a demand draft for the balance amount.
2.
It is further submitted, on instructions, that if respondent No.1bank indicates that some more amount towards interest would be payable for delay in depositing the balance amount, the same could also be considered and made good by the petitioner. 3.
It is brought to our notice that respondent No.1-bank had subsequently conducted an auction in November 2025, when there were no bidders and another round is slated to be conducted on 30.01.2026. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the said by PRIYA KAMBLI Date:
2026.01.29 10:48:13 +0530 PRIYA KAMBLI 1/2
8_WP_15177_25.doc respondent may consider accepting the demand draft for the balance amount and specify some more amount towards interest for delayed payment of the balance amount, so that the writ petition itself could be disposed of.
4.
But, the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1-bank does not have specific instructions to accept the offer made on behalf of the petitioner.
5.
Considering the fact that in the rounds of auction, prior to 23.07.2025 as well as in the auction conducted in November 2025, there were no bidders and till date, the petitioner is the lone bidder, we are of the opinion that the writ petition can be kept pending for the respondent No.1 to consider the offer made by the petitioner and to give appropriate instructions to its counsel. 6.
In the meanwhile, the auction slated for 30.01.2026 would also reveal as to whether any interested bidders have made offers. 7.
In view of the above, list the petition for further consideration on 04.02.2026, to be included in the supplementary list. (SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, J.) (MANISH PITALE, J.) Priya Kambli 2/2