SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, DIPANKAR DATTA, JJ.
Authorised Officer, State Bank Of India - Appellant
Versus
C. Natarajan & Anr. - Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 2545 Of 2023 (Arising Out Of SLP(C) No.14896 Of 2018)
Decided On : 10-04-2023
Fact of the Case:
The Authorized Officer of the State Bank of India impugned a judgment allowing a writ petition by a contesting respondent who failed to pay the balance amount for an auctioned asset, resulting in forfeiture.Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Authorized Officer's exercise of power was not arbitrary and that the High Court erred in directing a refund as there was no unjust enrichment for the bank.Issues:
Whether the power of forfeiture was exercised arbitrarily, and whether the High Court was justified in interfering with the forfeiture order.Ratio Decidendi:
The court held that while discretion exists for time extension, it must be exercised reasonably. It emphasized that sub-rule (5) of rule 9 provides for forfeiture and should not be lightly interfered with unless exceptional circumstances exist.Final Decision:
The court set aside the High Court's judgment and allowed the appeal, finding no unjust enrichment for the bank.JUDGMENT :
(Dipankar Datta, J.)
1. Leave granted.
2. The Authorized Officer (for brevity “the Authorized Officer”, hereafter) of the State Bank of India, Stressed Asset Management Branch, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu (for brevity “the Bank”, hereafter) has impugned the judgment and order dated 27th March, 2018 of the Madras High Court allowing a writ petition (W.P. No.4519 of 2018) instituted by the contesting respondent herein.
3. The facts leading to institution of the writ petition, as recorded in the impugned judgment and order, are noticed hereunder:
b. The contesting respondent failed to arrange requisite funds and by a request letter dated 27th September, 2017, sought for extension of time to pay the balance of amount within 25 days. Acceding to such request, the Authorized Officer, on the following day, extended the time for payment till 23rd October, 2017. Two weeks prior to the extended last date for making payment of the balance amount, the contesting respondent received summons dated 10th October, 2017 from the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Coimbatore (for brevity “the DRT”, hereafter), intimating him that Stallion having filed an application under section 17 of the SARFAESI Act had applied for interim relief, which was set down for hearing on 6th November, 2017. Having learnt of pendency of proceedings before the DRT, the contesting respondent met the Authorized Officer who assured the contesting respondent of appropriate care to be taken to contest such proceedings. Hearing such assurance and while referring to the summons received from the DRT, the contesting respondent by his letter dated 20th October, 2017 prayed for further extension of time by 15 days to pay the balance amount. The request of the contesting respondent was rejected by the Authorized Officer by his letter dated 21st October, 2017 and the contesting respondent was advised to make payment of the balance amount on or before 23rd October, 2017. Since the contesting respondent did not pay the balance amount of the sale price by 23rd October, 2017, the Authorized Officer sent a letter dated 24th October, 2017 to the contesting respondent informing him that the e-auction sale held on 15th September, 2017, which was concluded in his favour, stands cancelled and that the amount of Rs. 30,75,000/-paid by him forfeited.
c. The contesting respondent, seeking to intervene in the proceedings before the DRT, had applied for advancement of the date of hearing of the application under section 17. He also applied for extension of time to deposit the balance amount till the disposal of the interim application filed before the DRT by Stallion. DRT advanced the hearing date from 6th November, 2017 to 31st October, 2017. An order dated 31st October, 2017 was also passed directing the Authorized Officer to maintain status quo an
Agarwal Tracom Private Ltd vs Punjab National Bank and Ors.
Bankura Municipality vs Lalji Raja & Sons
Mardia Chemicals vs Union of India
Mahabir Kishore vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandal Ltd. vs. CCE & Customs
The court affirmed that banks must comply with statutory requirements and not engage in arbitrary actions against successful auction bidders, protecting rights under Article 14.
Forfeiture of EMD under Rule 9 of SARFAESI Rules is impermissible during a binding judicial stay, as it violates natural justice and can lead to unjust enrichment.
The SARFAESI Act mandates strict adherence to auction payment timelines, allowing forfeiture of deposits for non-compliance.
The excess amount paid by the petitioner, beyond 25% of the bid amount, could not be considered as a deposit under Rule 9, and any retention of amount by the respondent without authority of law would....
(1) Auction sale of secured asset – Forfeiture of earnest money deposit – Consequence of forfeiture of 25% of deposit under Rule 9(5) of SARFAESI Rules is a legal consequence that has been statutoril....
Rule 9(5) of the SARFAESI Act mandates forfeiture of earnest money for non-payment of the balance auction price, overriding general contract law principles.
Forfeiture of 25% bid amount under SARFAESI Rules 9(5) is mandatory on default, unaffected by higher subsequent sale or absence of loss; equity cannot override statutory provision. (28 words)
Rule 9(5) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 is directory in nature, and forfeiture is justified only to compensate for the pa....
The extension of the time limit for depositing the remaining sale amount and the forfeiture of the deposit are governed by the agreement between the purchaser and the secured creditor, and judicial r....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.