Dismissed

Kamal Amim v. Bank of India

DRT21 Mar 2024SA/291/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal dismissed the applicant's challenge against the withdrawal of an e-auction caused by a technical glitch. Upholding the bank's decision, the Tribunal vacated an interim stay order and directed the bank to refund the applicant's deposited consideration within seven days.

What did the court decide?

Refund of consideration paid by the applicant to the Respondent Bank within seven days.

Kamal Amim versus Bank of India — Company and Corporate | DRT (2024)

¶1

¶2

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL – 1, KOLKATA JEEVANSUDHA BLDG. 9^TH FLOOR, 42/C, J.L.NEHRU ROAD, KOLKATA – 700071

¶3

BEFORE SHRI AMBUJA MOHAN DAS, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

SA No. 291 of 2023

¶5

MR. KAMAL AMIM

¶6

Residing at 36,Cowies Ghat Road,Shibpur,Howrah-700 102.

¶7

…….. Applicant

¶8

¶9

Bank of India

¶10

Having its office at Howrah Zonal Office, Recovery Department,4^th Floor,5, B.T.M. Sarani Kolkata-700 001.

¶11

The Authorised Officer functions from its office at Howrah Zonal Office, Recovery Department,4^th Floor,5, B.T.M. Sarani Kolkata-700 001.

¶12

3.Tapas Kumar Chandra

¶13

Subhra Chandra

¶14

3 & 4 Both residing at 23/1/1 Loknath Chatterjee Lane ,Shibpur Howrah,Pin-711102.

¶15

Supriya Chandra

¶16

At 259,Bangur Avenue,Kolkata-700 055.

¶17

6. Rajib Mukhopadhay

¶18

At 2, Ananda Kumar Roy chowdhury Lane, Shibpur, Howrah711102.

¶19

Respondents.

¶20

Present:

¶21

For Applicant : Mr. Gourav Singh, Ld. Counsel For Respondents: Ms. Anindita Das & A. Sen, Ld. Counsels

¶22

J U D G E M E N T

¶23

Delivered on 21^st March, 2024

¶24

¶25

The Sarfaesi Applicant (Mr. Kamal Amim ) is the participant in the e-auction held on 10^th July,2023 pursuant to the sale notice dated 18^th June, 2023. It is contended by the Applicant that in the said e-auction the Applicant is the Successful bidder and paid entire consideration which includes the bid amount on the next date of sale dated 11/07/2023 vide letter ‘D’.

¶26

But the Respondent bank issued letter on 10th July, 2023 to the Applicant communicating that there was a technical glitch made in the e-portal for which the e-auction held on 10th July, 2023 has been cancelled and applicant has been requested to take refund of the amount deposited.

¶27

Thereafter, the Respondent Bank has published another Sale Notice for e-auction on 03/08/2023 for sale on 07/09/2023. The Applicant has annexed the publication of Sale Notice dated 03/08/2023 vide letter ‘G’. It is contended by the Applicant that subsequent sale notice dated 03/08/2023 is illegal as the sale was completed on 10/07/2023 and Applicant is the highest bidder in the e-auction held on 10^th July, 2023 and Applicant is the highest bidder in the e-auction on 10/07/2023.

¶28

¶29

It is contended by the Applicant that Bank has received entire consideration amount for which the Applicant has challenged the Sale Notice dated 03/08/2023 for e-auction on 07/09/2023 and prayed to declare the notice dated 25/07/2023 invalid and to cancel the e-auction to be held on 03/08/2023 and prayed for interim order restraining the Respondent Bank to proceed for sale on 03/08/2023.

¶30

Applicant has also filed IA/1868 of 2023 challenging the Sale Notice dated 03/08/2023 for e-auction on 07/09/2023 with interim order.

¶31

The Respondent Bank has filed affidavit in opposition to the SA and IA/1868 of 2023. It is contended by the Respondent Bank that there was a technical glitch in the e-portal for which in the e- auction scheduled to be held on 10th July, 2023 other bidders could not participate in the auction and on the same date one Mr. Pinaki Banerjee has sent an email to MSTC stating that the website of MSTC was suddenly blocked for him at about 5.00 pm on 10th July,2023, when the e-auction was in progress.

¶32

It is contended by the Respondent Bank that due to technical glitch the Respondent Bank has canceled the e-auction on 10/07/2023 and has not confirmed the sale and asked the

¶33

¶34

Applicant to take refund of the earnest money deposited. The Applicant voluntary deposited the balance consideration though the Applicant has not confirmed the sale and not asked to deposit money.

¶35

On the above grounds the Respondent Bank submitted that the SA and IAs are not maintainable and are liable to be dismissed in limine with exemplary costs.

¶36

The Respondent Bank has filed intimation of MSTC portal vide Annexure ’B’ and intimation to the Applicant about the technical glitch and to take refund of the earnest money deposited.

¶37

In view of the technical glitch other bidders could not participate in the e-auction. So the auction in which Applicant participated cannot be held valid e-auction.

¶38

The Respondent Bank rightly cancelled the e-auction and intimated to take refund of the earnest money deposited but the Applicant without asking by the Respondent Bank deposited the entire sale consideration for which the Bank cannot be held responsible.

¶39

¶40

There is an interim order against the Respondent Bank dated 06/09/2023 to maintain statusquo in respect of the secured asset without leave of the Tribunal. It appears from the pleadings of both the parties that Respondent Bank has issued a subsequent Sale Notice dated 03/08/2023 for e-auction on 07/09/2023 and bid was received but due to interim order sale could not be confirmed.

¶41

12.The Applicant has cited the judgment of Hon’ble Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata in Diary No. 213 of 2019 dated 05/09/2019 wherein it is held that Hon’ble DRAT has find no reason for interference in the interim order.

¶42

This order is not applicable to ratio of the order as at the time of granting of interim order this Tribunal was not aware about the technical glitch in the MSTC portal.

¶43

The Applicant has failed to prove that the sale made on 10/07/2023 is a valid sale. The sale was cancelled due to technical glitch in the MSTC portal. The Respondent Bank proceeded for subsequent sale notice dated 03/08/2023 for sale on 07/09/2023 as per Sarfaesi Act and Rules. There is no merit in the SA of the Applicant to cncel the notice dated 25/07/2023 intimating the cancel of e-auction on 10/07/2023. It is ordered as follows:

¶44

¶45

O R D E R

¶46

i) SA/291/2023 and IA/1868 of 2023 are dismissed on contest against the Respondents.

¶47

ii) Interim order passed on 06/09/2023 to maintain statusquo in respect of the secured asset is vacated.

¶48

iii) The Respondent Bank shall refund the consideration paid by the applicant within seven days.

¶49

Copy of the Judgment/Final Order be uploaded in the

¶50

Tribunal’s website.

¶51

File is consigned to the Record Room.

¶52

(Dictated to P.S., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the day 21^th March, 2024.

(Ambuja Mohan Das)

Presiding Officer

	Order Sheet (continuation)
Case NO.	SA/291/2023 KAMAL AMIM., VS. BANK OF INDIA & ors.
Date of the Order	Order with Signature	Office action with date and dated Signature of Parties when necessary
21/03/2024	Present:
	For Applicant : Mr. Gourav Singh, Ld. Counsel
	For Respondents: Ms. Anindita Das & A. Sen, Ld. Counsels
	Matter was heard from the parties on 25/02/2024.
	The detailed order in six pages annexed separately. The gist of the order is as follows:
	O R D E R
	i) SA/291/2023 and IA/1868 of 2023 are dismissed on contest against the Respondents.
	ii) Interim order passed on 06/09/2023 to maintain statusquo in respect of the secured asset is vacated.
	iii) The Respondent Bank shall refund
	the consideration paid by the applicant within seven days.
	Copy of the Judgment/Final Order be uploaded in the Tribunal’s website.
	File is consigned to the Record Room.

¶57

(Dictated to P.S., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the day 21^th March, 2024.

¶58

(Ambuja Mohan Das) Presiding Officer

¶59

¶60

Order Sheet (continuation)
Case NO. SA/291/2023 KAMAL AMIM., VS. BANK OF INDIA & ors.
Office action with
date and dated
Signature of
Date of Order with Signature Parties when necessary
the Order

Kamal Amim v. Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamal Amim v. Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Raja Sekh

Hdfc Bank versus Akibaddin Sekh

Ifci Limited versus Jangipur Bengal Mega Food Park Ltd.

Ms Iqbal Tannery versus Punjab National Bank

Ms La Chemico Pvt. Ltd. versus PNB Housing Finance Limited

Shyamal Karar and Ors. versus Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited