Supreme Court stays auction of farmer’s land over unpaid loan

New Delhi [India], October 30 (ANI): The Supreme Court has stayed the auction of a farmer’s land in Uttar Pradesh. The Dalit farmer, Sukhram, had taken a loan of Rs 23,049 from the Uttar Pradesh Cooperative Rural Development Bank Ltd. for dairy and buffalo farming.

Despite repaying a portion of the loan, Sukhram passed away in 2000. However, in 2002, the administration initiated auction proceedings against his estate to recover the remaining Rs. 7,397.

The farmer’s son challenged the auction, arguing that legal proceedings cannot be initiated against a deceased individual. While the Commissioner had initially set aside the auction, the High Court upheld the decision.

After hearing the plight of the farmer, the top court issued notice to concerned respondents and said, “In the meantime, status quo as on today shall be maintained.” Like this top court paused the auction and brought an interim relief to the farmer.

A bench of justices MM Sundresh and Justice Aravind Kumar on October 25 passed the interim order.

Advocates Utkarsh Singh, Md Tauheed Arshi, Mohd Humaid and Tushar Manohar Khairnar appeared for the petitioner and son of the deceased farmer.

The Petitioner challenged the order dated January 24 2023 and May 21 2024 passed by the High Court of Allahabad. Allahabad High Court was hearing the petition challenging the order dated January 3, 2007 passed by Judicial Commissioner, Allahabad Division, Allahabad by which objection of the petitioner herein was allowed and the auction dated February 15 2002 was cancelled on the ground that it was executed against the dead person. However High Court recalled the commissioner decision.

The petition said that HC decision was passed ex-parte as farmer counsel was not present in the court and he had no knowledge of the listing of the application before the court.

“This Special Leave Petition is preferred on the grounds that the High Court erred in dismissing the writ petition without considering the petitioner’s arguments and the principle of natural justice. The petitioners are facing irreparable loss and injury due to the dismissal, and the restoration of the writ petition is crucial for justice to prevail,” the petitioner said.