Auction sale confirmation under SARFAESI is not automatic; highest bidder has no vested right to a sale certificate.

Under the SARFAESI sale framework, confirmation of an auction sale remained subject to the secured creditor's approval, and the authorised officer's communication did not itself create an indefeasible right to a sale certificate. Because the secured creditor found defects in the statutory pre-sale notices, it was entitled to refuse confirmation. The Court held that a bidder does not acquire an automatic right to confirmation merely by being the highest bidder and making the initial deposit, and a writ court would ordinarily not issue a positive mandamus to compel confirmation in such circumstances. The challenge therefore failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petitioner was entitled to a mandamus directing issuance of a sale certificate and confirmation of the auction sale after payment of the bid amount in terms of the SARFAESI Rules.

Analysis: The sale notice and the governing rules made the auction subject to confirmation by the secured creditor. The authorised officer's communication did not by itself create an indefeasible right to confirmation. On verification, the secured creditor found a defect in the statutory notices issued before sale and, in that circumstance, declined to confirm the sale. A bidder cannot claim an automatic right to confirmation merely because the highest bid was accepted at the auction stage and the initial deposit was made. The Court also held that a writ court would not normally issue a positive mandamus to compel confirmation in such circumstances.

Conclusion: The petitioner was not entitled to the relief sought and the challenge to the refusal to confirm the sale failed.

---