Bank Auction, DRT Recovery Auction or IBC Liquidation Auction: How They Differ
Auction Dunia · Law and portal facts checked as of · 10 min read
The short answer
Three different legal processes produce what buyers call a “bank auction”: a SARFAESI sale by the bank’s Authorised Officer, a sale by a Recovery Officer of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, and a sale by a liquidator under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Each has its own seller, its own payment deadlines, its own way of being challenged and its own eligibility rules, and the sale notice tells you which one you are reading.
Key points
- Read the first lines of the notice: an Authorised Officer of a bank means SARFAESI, a Recovery Officer of a named DRT means a recovery-certificate sale, and a liquidator of a company “in liquidation” means an IBC sale.
- A SARFAESI sale needs no court order first (SARFAESI Act s.13(1)); a DRT sale follows a tribunal’s recovery certificate (RDB Act s.19(22), s.25); a liquidation sale follows the NCLT’s liquidation order (IBC s.33).
- The payment clocks differ: in a DRT sale the full price is due by the fifteenth day from the date of sale, not from confirmation (Income-tax Act, 1961, Second Schedule, Rule 57, applied by RDB Act s.29).
- Liquidation bidders must declare that they are eligible under IBC s.29A, and an ineligible winner’s EMD is forfeited (IBBI circular IBBI/LIQ/84/2025).
- Auction Dunia’s six-point check is defined for SARFAESI bank auctions; a DRT or liquidation sale is not checked against it.
Three sellers behind one word
When a loan goes unpaid, a lender has more than one route to recover it. It can enforce its security itself under the SARFAESI Act. It can sue before the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) and have the tribunal’s Recovery Officer sell the property. Or, where the borrower is a company, the company may end up in insolvency, and a liquidator appointed under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) sells its assets. All three are advertised as auctions, often on the same portals, and all three can involve a bank. They differ in how fast you must pay, who can undo the sale, and what you must prove about yourself to keep a winning bid.
The three sales side by side
| SARFAESI bank auction | DRT recovery-officer sale | IBC liquidation sale | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Who sells | The bank’s Authorised Officer (SARFAESI Act s.13(4); Rules 8–9) | The Recovery Officer of a DRT, executing a recovery certificate (RDB Act s.25, s.29) | The liquidator of a company in liquidation (IBC s.35(1)(f)) |
| What comes first | No court order; a demand notice, possession and a valid sale notice | The bank’s case before the DRT and a recovery certificate (RDB Act s.19(22)) | An NCLT order that the company be liquidated (IBC s.33) |
| First payment after winning | 25% of the price, including the EMD, the same day or by the next working day (Rule 9(3)) | 25% immediately after you are declared the purchaser (Second Schedule, Rule 57(1)), unless the notice provides otherwise | As the auction notice and Schedule I to the Liquidation Regulations state |
| Balance | By the fifteenth day of confirmation; up to three months only by written agreement (Rule 9(4)) | Full price on or before the fifteenth day from the date of sale (Rule 57(2)) | Within the period in the notice and Schedule I; late payment can attract interest and cancellation |
| When the sale is final | On full payment and the sale certificate (IOB v. RCM Infrastructure, SC, 2022) | On confirmation by the Recovery Officer, after the 30-day set-aside window (Rule 63) | On full payment; the liquidator then executes a certificate of sale or sale deed (Schedule I) |
| How it is challenged | Application to the DRT within 45 days (SARFAESI Act s.17) | Set-aside application to the Recovery Officer within 30 days of sale (Rules 60–61); appeal to the DRT within 30 days (RDB Act s.30) | Application to the NCLT (IBC s.60(5)); appeal to the NCLAT (s.61) |
| Portal | The portal the notice names: BAANKNET, MSTC or the bank’s provider | The provider the Recovery Officer’s notice names | BAANKNET, for auction notices issued on or after 1 April 2025 |
| Checks on the bidder | KYC and EMD as the notice requires | KYC and EMD as the notice requires | A declaration of eligibility under IBC s.29A, with the EMD at risk if ineligible |
The SARFAESI bank auction
This is the sale most people mean. The bank enforces its mortgage “without the intervention of the Court or tribunal” (SARFAESI Act s.13(1)), through a fixed sequence of notices and the Rule 9 payment deadlines. The buyer receives the borrower’s title and no better (s.13(6)). What sets it apart here is that no tribunal has looked at the case before the sale, and a challenge, if one comes, goes to the DRT under s.17.
The DRT recovery-officer sale
Here the bank has gone to court first. For debts of ₹20 lakh or more (RDB Act s.1(4); notification S.O. 4312(E), 6 September 2018), a bank files its claim before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. If the tribunal allows it, the Presiding Officer issues a recovery certificate (s.19(22)), and the tribunal’s Recovery Officer recovers the amount, including by attaching and selling the borrower’s property (s.25).
The Recovery Officer follows the procedure for tax recovery in the Second Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961, applied “as far as possible” with the necessary modifications (RDB Act s.29). The 1961 Act was replaced by the Income-tax Act, 2025 from 1 April 2026, and how s.29’s reference to the old Second Schedule now applies is not yet settled; follow the Recovery Officer’s notice. Under it, the declared purchaser pays 25% immediately and the full price on or before the fifteenth day from the date of sale (Rule 57). If the balance is not paid, the deposit may be forfeited and the property resold (Rule 58). Note the start point: fifteen days from the sale, not from confirmation as under SARFAESI Rule 9(4).
Because of the words “as far as possible”, the Recovery Officer’s notice can set its own terms. The Andhra Pradesh High Court upheld a sale where the notice allowed seven days for the 25% deposit (P. Mohanreddy v. Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, 2003). Follow the notice, and where it is stricter than the Rule, plan to the stricter clock.
The 30-day window after a DRT sale
For 30 days from the date of sale, the borrower or anyone whose interests are affected may apply to set the sale aside, either by depositing the amount due or on the ground that notice was not served or that a material irregularity in publishing or conducting the sale caused substantial injury (Rules 60–61). Only after that window, with full payment made and no application pending, does the Recovery Officer confirm the sale and make it absolute (Rule 63).
The IBC liquidation sale
When a company’s insolvency resolution fails, the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) orders it to be liquidated (IBC s.33). The liquidator then sells the company’s assets, by auction or private sale, under the Code and the IBBI (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016 (s.35(1)(f)). The bank is one creditor among several; it is not the seller. In some cases a secured creditor may instead realise its own security outside the liquidation (s.52), and the notice will then come from that creditor.
Two features are particular to these sales. First, the liquidator may not sell to a person who is not eligible to be a resolution applicant under s.29A (proviso to s.35(1)(f)). Section 29A disqualifies several categories, including certain persons connected with the company’s promoters and management. Since a January 2025 amendment to the Liquidation Regulations, the liquidator no longer screens bidders before the auction; every bidder submits the documents and a s.29A eligibility declaration through the platform, and the auction notice must say that an ineligible bidder’s EMD will be forfeited (IBBI circular IBBI/LIQ/84/2025, 28 March 2025).
Second, the portal is fixed. For liquidation auction notices issued on or after 1 April 2025, liquidators must use the BAANKNET auction platform (formerly eBKray), and EMD is paid through it (same circular). The balance is paid as the notice directs. The payment period in Schedule I to the Regulations has been amended more than once, so take the deadline from the notice in front of you.
When an insolvency stops a bank auction
The two systems also meet in the middle of a SARFAESI sale. Once the NCLT admits a corporate insolvency case, a moratorium bars “any action to foreclose, recover or enforce any security interest” of the company, including SARFAESI action (IBC s.14(1)(c)). In Indian Overseas Bank v. RCM Infrastructure (Supreme Court, 2022), the sale had been confirmed and 25% paid, but insolvency began before the balance came in; the bank could not complete the sale. Where the borrower or a mortgagor is a company, an NCLT search belongs in the checks before EMD.
How to tell from the notice which sale it is
- Who signs it. An Authorised Officer of a named bank points to SARFAESI; a Recovery Officer of a named DRT points to a recovery sale; a liquidator, usually with an IBBI registration number, points to IBC.
- What law it cites. SARFAESI notices refer to the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, often Rules 8 and 9, and to the s.13(2) demand notice. DRT notices refer to a recovery certificate number and the RDB Act. Liquidation notices refer to the Code, the Liquidation Regulations and an NCLT order.
- Whose property it is. A liquidation notice names the seller as a company “in liquidation”. SARFAESI and DRT notices name the borrower and the mortgagor.
- What it asks of you. A s.29A eligibility declaration is a liquidation sale. A deadline counted from the date of sale rather than from confirmation suggests a DRT sale.
If the notice is unclear, ask the officer named on it before paying EMD. The answer decides every clock that follows.
What each means for your due diligence
The property records do not change with the kind of sale. A 30-year encumbrance certificate, a litigation search, the municipal and revenue records and a match between the notice schedule and the title deeds matter in all three. In every case the sale is typically “as is where is”, and none of the three sellers warrants the title.
What changes is the procedure you are checking. In a SARFAESI sale it is the bank’s notices and Rule 9 compliance. In a DRT sale it is the recovery certificate, the Recovery Officer’s notice and the 30-day set-aside window. In a liquidation sale it is the NCLT order, the liquidator’s notice and your own s.29A eligibility.
Auction Dunia’s six-point check is defined for SARFAESI bank auctions. A DRT or liquidation sale is not checked against that definition.
What the auction route cannot promise
- A DRT sale can be set aside on an application made within 30 days of the sale, and a liquidation sale can be challenged before the NCLT; winning the auction does not end either risk.
- No seller in any of the three processes warrants the title; the buyer receives what the borrower or the company held.
- An insolvency admitted against a corporate borrower before the balance is paid can stop a SARFAESI sale from completing.
- Payment periods in DRT and liquidation sales can differ from notice to notice; the notice governs, and a missed deadline can cost the deposit.
Questions buyers ask
Sources
Statutes, rules and judgments first. Checked as of 19 October 2026; the law and portal practice change, so confirm against the source before relying on a detail.
- StatuteRecovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 — full text (ss.1(4), 19, 25, 29, 30)
- StatuteRDB Act s.29 — application of the Income-tax Act’s Second and Third Schedules
- StatuteInsolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — IBBI legal framework (ss.14, 29A, 33, 35, 52, 60, 61)
- RegulatorIBBI circular IBBI/LIQ/84/2025, 28 Mar 2025 — mandatory use of BAANKNET for liquidation auctions
- RegulatorIBBI — FAQ on the BAANKNET listing and auction portal (as on 21 Jul 2025)
- StatuteIncome-tax Act, 2025 (Act 30 of 2025), Gazette of India — s.536 (repeal of the 1961 Act)
- RulesSecurity Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 — Rules 8 and 9
- JudgmentP. Mohanreddy v. Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh High Court, 21 Nov 2003 (reproduces Second Schedule Rules 57, 58, 61, 63)
- JudgmentIndian Overseas Bank v. RCM Infrastructure Ltd, Supreme Court, 18 May 2022
This guide explains the law and the process in general terms. It is not advice on any specific property; that belongs in a due diligence report on the property itself.
A specific property in mind?
Tell us what you are buying it for, and we will tell you what needs checking before you pay EMD.
Talk to the desk