Court cancels tender acceptance due to non-payment, forfeiting earnest money. Purchaser's delays deemed inadequate. The Court ruled in favor of cancelling the acceptance of the tender due to the purchaser's persistent failure to comply with payment terms, leading to ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Court cancels tender acceptance due to non-payment, forfeiting earnest money. Purchaser's delays deemed inadequate.
The Court ruled in favor of cancelling the acceptance of the tender due to the purchaser's persistent failure to comply with payment terms, leading to forfeiture of earnest money. Despite multiple extensions and accommodations granted by the Court, the purchaser, Sri Prem Mohan Singh, repeatedly failed to deposit the required amounts within specified timelines. The Court found the reasons provided for non-compliance to be lacking in genuineness and instructed the Official Liquidator to submit a report for re-advertisement of the company's properties for sale.
Issues: 1. Non-compliance with payment terms by the purchaser. 2. Request for deferment of payment and repeated extensions granted by the Court. 3. Failure to deposit instalments and reasons provided by the purchaser. 4. Submission of cheque instead of bank draft for payment. 5. Consideration of reasons for non-compliance and decision on forfeiture of earnest money.
Analysis: 1. The judgment revolves around the non-compliance of the purchaser, Sri Prem Mohan Singh, with the payment terms set by the Court. Despite repeated extensions and accommodations, the purchaser failed to deposit the required amounts within the specified timelines, leading to a breach of the agreement.
2. The Court had granted multiple opportunities for the purchaser to defer payment and provided extensions for depositing instalments. However, the purchaser consistently failed to meet the deadlines, indicating a pattern of delaying tactics and taking advantage of the leniency offered by the Court.
3. The purchaser submitted a cheque instead of a bank draft for payment, which was not in accordance with the prescribed payment method. Despite being given additional time to rectify this discrepancy, the purchaser could not comply within the stipulated timeframe, further delaying the payment process.
4. Various reasons were presented by the purchaser for the non-compliance, including local law and order issues, security concerns, and challenges in obtaining financial assistance. However, the Court found these reasons to be lacking in genuineness and questioned the purchaser's intentions, especially considering his background and familiarity with the area.
5. Ultimately, the Court decided to cancel the acceptance of the tender due to the purchaser's persistent failure to meet payment obligations and forfeited the earnest money deposited. The Official Liquidator was instructed to submit a report for re-advertisement of the company's properties for sale, highlighting the consequences of the purchaser's non-compliance with the payment terms.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
