State of arttar pradesh(supra) held that public authorities conducting sale of property must ensure fairness and transparency and should obtain a reasonable price for the property. Similarly, the Hon'ble High Court in C, Ryan Babu v, BKL Traders observed that where there exists a vast disparity between the guideline value and the upset price fixed for auction, the action of the secured creditor becomes arbitrary and liable to be interfered with. In the present case, the Tribunal finds that the reserve price fixed by the respondent bank is grossry disproportionate to the varue indicated by the Registration Department as well as the surrounding market circumstances. Such undervaluation defeats the fundamental objective underlying the SARFAESI Act, which is not merely recovery of dues but recovery through a fair and transparent process that secures maximum possibre varue of the secured asset. Though the respondent bank and the auction purchaser took the plea that one of the Flats was sold at Rs.12.65 lakhs and on comparison, the reserve price fixed by the bank was on higher side, this argument cannot be countenanced since the respondent bank being a public sector bank is bound to follow certain guidelines stipulated under the Act, 2002.
