Back
TAPABRATA CHAKRABORTY, RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY
West Bengal Financial Corporation – Appellant
Versus
Annapurna Engineering And Manufacturing Private Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Raja Basu Chowdhury, J. - The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 19th October, 2012 passed in WP No. 19306(W) of 2006 by which the learned Single Judge was inter alia pleased to direct the appellant to refund the forfeited deposit to the tune of Rs. 14.20 lakhs to the writ petitioners along with interest @ 12 % per annum from the date of institution of the writ petition till the date of payment. The appellant was also directed to pay costs of Rs. 20,000/- to the writ petitioners.
2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts are that on 12th May, 2004, the appellant, being the West Bengal Financial Corporation, published a sale notice in exercise of power under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1951) inviting offers for sale of various fixed assets inter alia including those of Bandel Ceramics Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Unit). The fixed assets of the Unit which formed part of the said advertisement was 'Land :
About 2 acres with Shed & Building, Jaw-Crusher, Pan Mill, Pulveriser, Muller Mixture, 150 T Friction Scrow Press, Down Draft Kiln etc. with laboratory equipments'. The wri
The judgment establishes that failure to disclose material defects in the property and the lack of opportunity to remedy the breach disentitles the seller from forfeiting the deposit. It also emphasi....
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....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Bank's actions must adhere to the statutory provisions and be fair and transparent, especially in the context of property auctions under t....
Where a sum is named in a contract as a liquidated amount payable by way of damages, only reasonable compensation can be awarded not exceeding amount so stated. Similarly, in cases where amount fixed....
A seller must prove ownership and clear title to enforce forfeiture of an earnest deposit, especially when multiple legal heirs dispute the transaction.
The court emphasized the duty to disclose material facts in sale notifications and the principle of doing justice by promoting honesty and good faith.
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)
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
