##PAGE1##

MUMBAI BENCH-I IA (I.B.C)/3582(MB)2026 Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 Mamta Ravi Doshi & Ors.

...Applicants V/s Mr. Avil Menezes Liquidator of Auro Gold Private Limited …Respondent In the matter of COMPANY PETITION (IB) NO. 1802 OF 2019 STATE BANK OF INDIA …Petitioner / Financial Creditor V/s AURO GOLD JEWELLERY PRIVATE LTD.

…Respondent / Corporate Debtor Order delivered on: 28.10.2026 Coram:

Shri Prabhat Kumar Shri Sushil Mahadeorao Kochey Hon’ble Member (Technical) Hon’ble Member (Judicial)

Appearances:

For the Applicant : Adv. Shriya Mehta i/b Adv. Kunal Bhanage For the Respondent : Adv. Aniruth Purusothaman

ORDER

1. The present Interlocutory Application is filed by Mamta Ravi Doshi and Ravi Ghewarchand Doshi, Applicants, praying for the following reliefs:

a) “That the Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to quash and set aside forfeiture of EMD vide letter dated 13th May 2024.

b) That the liquidator may kindly be ordered and directed to refund the EMD amount of Rs.42,80,680/- with interest within seven days or within such period as the Hon'ble Tribunal deem, fit and proper.

c) Ad -interim relief in terms of prayers (a) and (b) above.

d) Such further or other orders be passed in the matter as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper.”

2. The Applicants had jointly participated in the e-auction conducted by Mr Avil Menezes, the liquidator of Auro Gold Jewellery Private Limited, and deposited a sum of Rs. 42,80,68-/- as Earnest Money along with a bid form for participation in the e-auction scheduled on 24.4.2024. The Applicants were unsuccessful bidders in the e-auction; accordingly, the Applicants claimed a refund of the Earnest Money, as it had become refundable under clause 11(vi) of the Process Memorandum. However, the Liquidator didn’t refund the said Earnest Money and forfeited the same vide letter dated 13.5.2024 for adjustment thereof against the claim for rent for occupation of the property in auction as its tenant against the Applicant(s), on account of the Applicant’s failure to provide details of rent paid for such occupation to the corporate debtor.

3. Being aggrieved, this application has been filed for directions to the respondent Liquidator to refund the said Earnest money and quashing of the communication dated 13.5.2024 forfeiting the said Earnest money.

4. We heard the parties and have perused the application, reply of the Liquidator and rejoinder thereto filed by the applicant.

5. Clause 11(vi) of the Process Memorandum provides that “No interest will be paid to the Bidders/Eligible Bidders in relation to any such amounts mentioned above. The EMD of the Successful Bidder shall be retained towards part sale consideration and the EMD of unsuccessful bidders shall be refunded. The Liquidator will issue a letter to the Successful Bidder and the Successful Bidder shall have to deposit the balance consideration (after adjustment of the EMD) of the sale price within 90 days of such demand. (Payments made after 30 days shall attract interest at the rate of 12% per annum). On payment of the full amount, the sale shall stand completed and the Liquidator shall execute certificate of sale or sale deed to transfer such assets and the Assets shall be delivered to the Successful Bidder in the manner specified in the terms of sale.” This clause makes the Earnest Money Deposit (EMD) paid by a bidder refundable, if such bidder is declared unsuccessful and does not provide any condition whereby such refund can be withheld.

6. The impugned letter dated 13.5.2024 reads as follows:

Dear Sir, Please find the attached herewith the order passed by the Hon'ble NCLT, Mumbai Bench dated 23 November 2023 in IA 2878/2023 wherein the counsel appearing for the respondent had informed that the rent has already paid to the erstwhile management and they are ready to give the details thereof. However, as on date no information/ details is received. Further, the Bench has directed that the Liquidator may