Kochar Sung-Up Acrylic Limited vs. Indian Overseas Bank And Another

Facts

The petitioner, Kochar Sung-Up Acrylic Limited, filed a writ petition challenging a Sale Rejection Letter dated December 22, 2020, which rejected their bid for a property. The respondents, Indian Overseas Bank and another, stated that the property was initially sold to M/s Regent Land Holdings Pvt. Ltd., whose earnest money was forfeited, leading to an order for re-auction. M/s Regent Land Holdings Pvt. Ltd. had filed a previous writ petition (CWP No. 22114 of 2020) challenging the forfeiture and re-auction. This prior petition was disposed of on December 21, 2020, with a direction that if M/s Regent Land Holdings Pvt. Ltd. deposited the entire amount along with 9% interest and GST, the bank would transfer the property and issue a sale certificate. Consequently, a sale certificate was issued on January 4, 2021, the re-auction was withdrawn, and the petitioner's bid was not accepted.

Held

The Court did not make a substantive finding on the merits of the petitioner's challenge to the Sale Rejection Letter. Instead, the Court noted the submissions made by the respondents regarding the prior proceedings and the subsequent issuance of a sale certificate to M/s Regent Land Holdings Pvt. Ltd. The respondents' counsel explained that following the High Court's order in CWP No. 22114 of 2020, M/s Regent Land Holdings Pvt. Ltd. had deposited the requisite amounts, including interest and GST, leading to the issuance of a sale certificate on January 4, 2021. This action rendered the re-auction unnecessary and, consequently, the petitioner's bid could not be accepted. Faced with this explanation, the learned counsel for the petitioner sought to withdraw the writ petition. The Court, therefore, dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn. No specific provision of the GST Act was discussed or applied in the decision.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Sale Rejection Letter dated December 22, 2020, rejecting the petitioner's bid, is liable to be set aside. This issue turns on the provisions of the SARFAESI Act and the subsequent events following the disposal of CWP No. 22114 of 2020. The petitioner argued that their bid should have been considered. However, the respondents contended that the property had already been dealt with pursuant to the High Court's order in CWP No. 22114 of 2020. The respondents explained that after the previous writ petition was disposed of on December 21, 2020, with a direction for M/s Regent Land Holdings Pvt. Ltd. to deposit the full amount, interest, and GST, the bank issued a sale certificate to M/s Regent Land Holdings Pvt. Ltd. on January 4, 2021. As a result, the re-auction was withdrawn, and there was no basis for accepting the petitioner's bid. The petitioner, in light of these submissions, sought to withdraw their petition.