Bank Of Maharashtra vs Jai Kumar Bansal

ik-103836249 Delhi High Court 20 February 2026 • 10 min read

Judges (2)

Amit Mahajan Coram Anil Kshetarpal Delivered

Counsel (6)

Ananya Jain Counsel Respondent Rohan Garg Counsel Respondent Rohit Dutta Counsel Respondent Shyam Kishor Maurya Counsel Respondent Siddharth Dewalwar Counsel Respondent V.K. Gupta Counsel Appellant

Parties (2)

Bank of Maharashtra Appellant Jai Kumar Bansal Respondent

Case Significance

Bank Of Maharashtra vs Jai Kumar Bansal is a Delhi High Court decision dated February 20, 2026 (citation: ik-103836249). Bank of Maharashtra appealed a Commercial Court decree that held the bank liable for UPSIDA dues on properties sold via e-auction under SARFAESI Act to the respondent. The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal, holding the bank did not violate its statutory duty of disclosure, the auction was conducted on 'as is where is' basis, and the purchaser was bound by the contractual terms regarding authority dues. The bench comprised Justices Amit Mahajan and Anil Kshetarpal. The judgment was delivered by Justice Anil Kshetarpal. Counsel appearing: Ananya Jain (counsel for respondent), Rohan Garg (counsel for respondent), Rohit Dutta (counsel for respondent), Shyam Kishor Maurya (counsel for respondent), Siddharth Dewalwar (counsel for respondent), V.K. Gupta (counsel for appellant).

Summary

Bank of Maharashtra appealed a Commercial Court decree that held the bank liable for UPSIDA dues on properties sold via e-auction under SARFAESI Act to the respondent. The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal, holding the bank did not violate its statutory duty of disclosure, the auction was conducted on 'as is where is' basis, and the purchaser was bound by the contractual terms regarding authority dues.

What was the outcome of Bank Of Maharashtra vs Jai Kumar Bansal?

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official India Courts portal.

Read on Indian Kanoon

Source: Indian Kanoon (ik-103836249)