Sanjay Singh v. Indian Bank and Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
In an appeal under Rule 22 of the DRT (Procedure) Rules, this court examined whether a bank could demand interest on a delayed auction deposit. The court held that the bank was entitled to charge delayed interest per RBI guidelines and forfeited 25% of the bid amount for non-deposit. The application was disposed of.
What did the court decide?
Application disposed off; no refund of forfeited amount; Bank entitled to charge interest on delayed payment.
Misc. Application No. 74/2023 In Appeal Dy. No. 435/2022
Sanjai Singh Vs. Indian Bank & 3 Ors.
Present: Shri Alok Rai, counsel for the applicant, Shri A. K. Srivastava, counsel for the respondent-Bank, None for the other respondents,
ORDER
Date : 22.04.2025
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that there is no provision in the SARFAESI Act, 2002 to charge the interest on the auction amount, therefore, the Bank may be directed to accept the remaining auction amount without any interest, otherwise refund the amount with interest.
Learned counsel for the respondent-Bank submitted that as per the circular of the Reserve Bank of India, the appellant is liable to pay the interest for the delayed period on the auction amount and 25% of the auction amount has already been forfeited on the ground that the remaining 75% of the bid amount was not deposited by the appellant. Accordingly, the order impugned was passed, which is under challenge in the present appeal. It was contended that the appeal has already been decided by this Appellate Tribunal vide order dated 17.05.2023 and the present application has been filed by the appellant under Rule of 22 of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1994.
Having heard the learned counsels for the parties and considering the material available on record, admittedly, the property in question was auctioned on 25.11.2020, in which the appellant was found to be highest bidder and 25% of the sale amount was deposited, but the remaining 75% of the said amount was not deposited, therefore, 25% of the auction amount was forfeited by the respondent-Bank. Further, the appellant filed an application No. 12 of 2021 for impleadment, but the same was not allowed by the Tribunal below observing that there is nothing, for which opportunity of hearing to the
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Bank is entitled to charge interest on the auction amount for the delayed period of deposit?
Whether the appellant is entitled to refund of the forfeited bid amount without depositing the balance?
Whether the appellant is entitled to interest on the balance amount deposited late?
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Sanjai Singh
- respondent
Indian Bank
Coram
R. D. Khare
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- DRAT
- Decided on
- · April
- CNR
- 091090004352022
- Topic
- Banking and Recovery
All orders in this case
11 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court