Petitioner sought writ to forfeit refund mining bid earnest money due to one-day delay in deposit caused by bank server issues. Bench held that complex contractual disputes require proper suit, dismissed writ.
Petition dismissed with liberty to file civil suit for recovery of amounts.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
I N THE HI GH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDI GARH
Ci vi l Wr i t Pet i t i on No. 24283 of 2017 ( O&M) DATE OF DECI SI ON: 16. 02. 2018
M/ s Hor nbi l l Consul t ant s
…. . Pet i t i oner
ver sus
St at e of Punj ab and ot her s
CORAM: - HON’ BLE MR. JUSTI CE S. J. VAZI FDAR, CHI EF JUSTI CE HON’ BLE MR. JUSTI CE AVNEESH JHI NGAN
Pr esent : Mr . Gur mi nder Si ngh, Seni or Advocat e wi t h Mr . H. S. Deol , Advocat e f or t he pet i t i oner Mr . P. S. Baj wa, Addl . Advocat e Gener al , Punj ab
S. J. VAZI FDAR, CHI EF JUSTI CE ( Or al ) :
The pet i t i oner i s a sol e pr opr i et or y concer n of one Di l awar Si ngh Sandhu. Respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 ar e t he Di r ect or Mi ni ng, t he St at e Geol ogi st and t he Gener al Manager - cum- Mi ni ng Of f i cer of t he Di st r i ct I ndust r i es Cent r e, Amr i t sar , Punj ab.
Parkash Chand 2018.02.16 10:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP- 24283- 2017
- 2 -
r espondent No. 2 t o gr ant i t appr oval wi t h r espect t o mi ni ng t he Rur ewal a Mi ne. Last l y, t he pet i t i oner has sought a wr i t of mandamus di r ect i ng t he r espondent s t o r ef und t he ear nest money and secur i t y deposi t ed by i t i n case t he appr oval t o mi ne t he sai d mi ne i s deni ed.
The mai n pr ayer , t her ef or e, i s t o enf or ce t he pet i t i oner ’ s r i ght t o car r y on mi ni ng oper at i ons. The r ef und was sought i n t he al t er nat i ve. Today, however , t he pet i t i oner has abandoned hi s cl ai m t o car r y on t he mi ni ng oper at i ons and has onl y sought t he r ef und of t he ear nest money and t he secur i t y deposi t deposi t ed by hi m wi t h t he r espondent s.
“ 6. The pr ospect i ve bi dder shal l deposi t t he Ear nest money, pr ocessi ng f ee t hr ough a desi gnat ed bank account whi ch shoul d be i n hi s name ( or Company/ f i r m) . The det ai l of t hi s desi gnat ed bank account shoul d be as per t he per f or ma gi ven at Annexur e- A of t hi s not i ce and shoul d be upl oaded on t he e- pr ocur ement websi t e. I n case, t he det ai l i s not upl oaded as per Annexur e- A or pr ospect i ve bi dder upl oads t he det ai l wi t hout bank at t est at i on or wi t hout hi s si gnat ur es, t hen he wi l l not be al l owed t o par t i ci pat e i n t he e- auct i on.
Parkash Chand 2018.02.16 10:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP- 24283- 2017
- 3 -
pai d by t he successf ul bi dder onl y t hr ough t hi s desi gnat ed bank account and he wi l l not be abl e t o deposi t t he amount f r om any ot her bank account .
Parkash Chand 2018.02.16 10:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP- 24283- 2017
- 4 -
The pr ovi si onal accept ance was i ssued on 05. 07. 2017 and under t he t er ms and condi t i ons t he amount s wer e t o be deposi t ed by 5. 00 P. M. on 10. 07. 2017 ( t he weekend had i nt er vened as a r esul t wher eof t he st i pul at ed per i od of t wo days was ext ended up t o 10. 07. 2017) . The amount s wer e t o be deposi t ed i n a desi gnat ed account of t he r espondent s at t he Axi s Bank. Thi s was not i f i ed by a cor r i gendum dat ed 15. 06. 2017. The det ai l s r egar di ng t he account wer e al so sent t hr ough t he pr ovi si onal accept ance dat ed 05. 07. 2017.
Two separ at e t r ansact i ons of Rs. 28. 75 l akhs and Rs. 9. 60 l akhs wer e t o be execut ed by way of t r ansf er s i nt o t he desi gnat ed bank account of t he pet i t i oner f r om hi s ot her account . However , due t o ser ver pr obl ems i n hi s bank, t he t r ansf er s coul d not t ake pl ace. The t r ansf er s coul d not t ake pl ace even on 08. 07. 2017 and 09. 07. 2017 as t he banks wer e cl osed on account of 8t h Jul y, 2017 bei ng a second Sat ur day of t he mont h and 09. 07. 2017 bei ng a Sunday. The l ast dat e f or deposi t was 10. 07. 2017. On 10. 07. 2017, t he sai d amount s of Rs. 28. 75 l akhs and Rs. 9. 60 l akhs wer e cr edi t ed i nt o t he pet i t i oner ’ s account at 3. 40 P. M. and 4. 20 P. M. , r espect i vel y. The cut of f t i me f or RTGS t r ansf er s was 3. 30 P. M. and f or NEFT was 4. 30 P. M. Thus, t he amount s coul d not be t r ansf er r ed t o t he r espondent s’ desi gnat ed account by 5. 00 P. M. on 10. 07. 2017. The pet i t i oner t ook per mi ssi on on t he t el ephone f r om t he of f i ce of r espondent No. 2 f or deposi t i ng t he amount s by a demand dr af t . Accor di ngl y, a demand dr af t of Rs. 68, 46, 002/ - was obt ai ned by t he pet i t i oner i n f avour of t he r espondent concer ned. The pet i t i oner ’ s bank has conf i r med t hat t he di f f i cul t y was on i t s par t and not on t he pet i t i oner ’ s par t . Thi s was r ecor ded by t he pet i t i oner ’ s e- mai l dat ed 10. 07. 2017. The pet i t i oner t ook t he demand dr af t t o r espondent No. 2 on 10. 07. 2017 but beyond t he of f i ce hour s. He, t her ef or e, t ook i t agai n t o t he
Parkash Chand 2018.02.16 10:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP- 24283- 2017
- 5 -
r espondent s on 11. 07. 2017. The r espondent s r et ai ned t he demand dr af t f or t hr ee mont hs.
Parkash Chand 2018.02.16 10:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP- 24283- 2017
- 6 -
ascer t ai n as t o why and i n what ci r cumst ances t hey t ook t he deci si on t o r ej ect t he of f er t o deposi t t he amount assumi ng t hat t he same was t ender ed on 10. 07. 2017 i t sel f . The r espondent s have t hemsel ves suf f er ed a huge l oss. Gr ant i ng t he pet i t i oner t he r el i ef cl ai med woul d pr e- j udge t he r espondent s’ cl ai m t o damages i f made. The r espondent s wer e admi t t edl y not t o bl ame f or t he del ay. The pet i t i oner ’ s di f f i cul t i es wer e on account of hi s bank’ s di f f i cul t i es. The cont r act ual r i ght s woul d have t o be ascer t ai ned and adj udi cat ed upon keepi ng t hese and sever al ot her f act or s i n mi nd. We ar e, t her ef or e, of t he opi ni on t hat t he pet i t i oner must be r el egat ed t o appr opr i at e pr oceedi ngs f or t he r ecover y of t hese amount s.
( S. J. VAZI FDAR) CHI EF JUSTI CE
( AVNEESH JHI NGAN) JUDGE
NOTE: Whet her speaki ng/ non- speaki ng: Speaki ng Whet her r epor t abl e: YES/ NO
Parkash Chand 2018.02.16 10:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can direct refund of earnest money in proceedings based on technical delay in e-auction deposit.
Whether the petitioner has established fault-free default causing contractual breach warranting specific relief.
Whether the proper forum for adjudicating contractual rights and quantum of loss is civil suit rather than writ.
M/s Hornbill Consultants
State of Punjab
S. J. VAZIFDAR
AVNEESH JHIINGAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
