appearance in that case. In fact, it was argued that the Bank had come to know from the Civil Suit that there are other legal heirs of Asha Rani, apart from Sham Lal Goyal, Harsh Goyal and Kunal Goyal. However, the fact remains that Sham Lal Goyal, Harsh Goyal and Kunal Goyal never informed the Bank in writing that there are other legal heirs of Asha Rani. There is also no denying the fact that after the conclusion of the auction proceedings the Bank had written a letter to Mr. Sham Lal Goyal asking him to disclose the names of all the legal heirs of Asha Rani so that the surplus amount of the auction be paid to them. However, the Applicants again did not respond to the same. This deserves to be noticed that on 11.09.2025, Archana and other daughters of Asha Rani filed a Civil Suit before the Civil Court at Karnal for declaration etc. wherein, the Bank moved an application under order 7 rule 11 CPC. The said Civil Suit is pending. Again, Archana and others filed CWP no. 31862/2025 in the Hon’ble High Court and the Hon’ble High Court asked them as to why they did not approach the DRT and dismissed CWP No. 31862/2025. Thereafter, Archana and other daughters of Asha Rani moved an application on 29.10.2025 for impleading them as parties to the present SA. It is abundantly clear from the facts that prior to 11.09.2025, (when they had filed the Civil Suit in the Karnal Court), Archana and others had come to know that the Bank has sold the property in SARFAESI proceedings. They neither filed any separate securitization application nor filed any application for impleading them as parties to the present SA. I am of the considered view that as far as Archana and others are concerned, their challenge to the SARFAESI action, after 45 days, is barred by limitation. Apart from this Mr. Sham Lal Goyal and others have challenged the auction on the ground that the Bank had undervalued the property. It was argued that the Bank had fixed up the reserve price below the distress value, which could not be done. However, this deserves to be mentioned that Bank had put up the property for auction on seven occasions. In the first six occasions, the Bank was not successful. It was only on the seventh occasion that the Bank was able to find a bidder. In these circumstances, I am of the considered view that it cannot be said that the Bank had undervalued the property. This also deserves to be mentioned that the Applicants and Archana and others made every conceivable effort to sabotage the recovery by the Bank. They tried to halt the recovery of the Bank by getting a Civil Suit filed against them from one Neeraj Garg on the basis of an agreement to sell, which was allegedly executed by Asha Rani prior to 02.12.2020. I am of the considered view that this Civil Suit was filed by Neeraj Garg at the instance of the Applicants and Archana and others. I am of the considered view that Mr. Sham Lal Goyal and others also played a fraud with the Bank by first executing an agreement to sell and later, Asha Rani mortgaged the same property with the Bank. Further, Mr. Sham Lal Goyal and others did not disclose all the legal heirs of Asha Rani when they filed
