Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Neeraj Kumar Vs Bank of India — Banking and Recovery | Patna HC (2019)

Home
Patna HC
2019
Neeraj Kumar Vs Bank of IndiaNeeraj Kumar v. Bank of India

Disposed

Neeraj Kumar v. Bank of India

Patna HC22 Nov 2019CWJC/18404/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ application challenging an auction notice under the SARFAESI Act was held infructuous after payments were made, so the petition was disposed of.

What did the court decide?

The writ application was held infructuous and disposed of accordingly.

What the court decided

AI extract

A

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18404 of 2019

======================================================

Neeraj Kumar Son of Sri Gopalji Prasad R/o Village-Kajibazar, Police Station-Maharajganj, District-Siwan

... ... Petitioner

Versus

Bank of India through its Zonal Manager, Muzaffarpur Zone, Bihar

Chief Manager Bank of India, Muzaffarpur Branch, Bihar

Authorised Officer, Bank of India, Muzaffarpur, Bihar

Branch Manager, Bank of India, Harajganj Branch, Siwan

... ... Respondents

======================================================

Appearance :

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Neeraj Kumar Son of Sri Gopalji Prasad
respondent
Bank of India through its Zonal Manager, Muzaffarpur Zone, Bihar and others

Coram

AI extract

Rajeev Ranjan Prasad

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Patna HC
Decided on: 22 Nov 2019 · November
Registered: 4 Sept 2019
Case no.: CWJC/18404/2019

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Rajeev Ranjan Prasad

Upendra Sah Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.
21 Nov 2019
Ajay Kumar Thakur Vs The State of Bihar
21 Nov 2019
J. K. Medical Hall Vs The State of Bihar
21 Nov 2019
M/s Innotech Educational Society Vs The State Bank of India
22 Nov 2019

Cite this judgement

Neeraj Kumar v. Bank of India, CWJC/18404/2019 (PAT), decided on 22 November 2019.

The Patna High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Bench / Coram

Rajeev Ranjan Prasad

Parties & counsel

Outcome

The writ application was held infructuous and disposed of accordingly.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

The writ application challenging the auction sale notice under the SARFAESI Act, 2002 was found to be infructuous and therefore disposed of since the auction sale had not taken place and payments were made by the petitioner.

A compact analysis

This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar Sinha, Advocate ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER

2 22-11-2019 The petitioner has moved this Court in writ application against the auction notice issued under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘SARFAESI Act, 2002’).

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after some payment was made, the auction sale has been stopped and once again a fresh notice has been served upon him.

Learned counsel for the Bank submits that whatever be the position, the writ application is fit to be dismissed as against an auction sale notice the remedy of the petitioner lies before the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 17(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002.

Patna High Court CWJC No.18404 of 2019(2) dt.22-11-2019 2/2

At this stage, since the auction sale has not taken place and it is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that after some payments were made to the Bank, the auction sale notice has not been given effect to, in the opinion of this Court, nothing survives in this writ application. It has become infructuous and it is disposed of accordingly.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)

vats/-

U

CNR

BRHC010871122019

Topic

Banking and Recovery

Bench

Rajeev Ranjan Prasad

Disposal

DISPOSED

Anando Singh Vs The State of Bihar

22 Nov 2019

Mahanth Kaushal Kishore Das @ Kaushal Kishore Das Vs The State of Bihar

22 Nov 2019