https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303758 The court dismissed the petition seeking to quash a building plan sanction due to alleged misrepresentation and pending litigation regarding a property in New Delhi. The petitioner, who previously owned the property, challenged its sale to respondent Nos. 2 to 4 through proceedings under the SARFAESI Act but did not receive interim protection. As the only pending litigation related to the auction sale, the court held that the petitioner's remedy was to challenge the sale through the DRT or DRAT. With no interim protection granted, the court declined to intervene under Article 226, emphasizing that the Municipal Corporation Commissioner could not interfere in SARFAESI Act proceedings. en-us Wed, 09 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Aug 2022 20:12:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303758 The court dismissed the petition seeking to quash a building plan sanction due to alleged misrepresentation and pending litigation regarding a property in New Delhi. The petitioner, who previously owned the property, challenged its sale to respondent Nos. 2 to 4 through proceedings under the SARFAESI Act but did not receive interim protection. As the only pending litigation related to the auction sale, the court held that the petitioner's remedy was to challenge the sale through the DRT or DRAT. With no interim protection granted, the court declined to intervene under Article 226, emphasizing that the Municipal Corporation Commissioner could not interfere in SARFAESI Act proceedings. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 09 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303758