TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 364
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....et aside and the appeal was dismissed. Brief facts in nutshell are as follows: 3. The firm-respondent no.3, had taken a loan from the respondent no.1-Bank. However, as it went into default, the Bank initiated proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 SARFAESI Act . In the said recovery proceedings, the Recovery Officer conducted an open auction. The appellants were the highest bidder. Their bid was accepted and they made good the deposits as per the terms of this auction. Accordingly, a sale certificate was issued in their favour on 30.03.2009. It may be noted here that the appellants were tenants of the borrower in the premises in question which had been....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to refund the auction money with interest as applicable to fixed deposit. The sale is accordingly set aside and it is made clear that Bank will refund the auction money only after receiving possession of property from auction purchaser within 15 days from the delivery of auction purchaser to the Bank. The applicant is directed to pay the dues of the sic within 15 days with upto date interest, failing which Bank will be at liberty to proceed further under Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002 to recover its dues. xxx xxx xxx" 6. In effect the DRT, after setting aside the sale, further proceeded to direct the Bank to refund the auction money with interest as applicable....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... not substantiate with any material to rebut the findings recorded by the DRT, DRAT and the High Court that the Bank had failed to follow the statutory provisions of notice under Rules 8(6) and 8(7) of the 2002 Rules. It was further submitted that as the appellants have enjoyed the property as it was already in their possession, they cannot claim any additional compensation for the improvements made by them as they were well aware of the litigation initiated by the borrower by filing an application under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act and whatever improvements have been made were at their own risk. 10. Further, learned counsel for the borrower (respondent nos.3 and 4) submitted that they have already paid the entire outstanding dues of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n money of Rs.12.40 lacs is lying in a separate fixed deposit and this amount is in addition to the outstanding amount deposited by the borrower after the auction sale. 12. Considering the above facts and circumstances and the arguments advanced, we proceed to deal with the same: (i). In view of the concurrent finding based on the admission by the Bank that mandatory notice of 30 days was not given to the Borrower before holding the auction/sale, the setting aside of the auction/sale cannot be faulted with. The same has to be approved. (ii). Once the sale is set aside, the status of the appellants as owners would automatically revert to that of tenants. The status of possession at best could have been altered from that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... if the auction money with 12 per cent per annum compound interest is returned to the appellants. Such interest be calculated from the date of deposit till the date it is actually paid. (v). There was some dispute between the Bank and the borrower that there could be minor adjustments still left. We are of the view that if any additional amount is lying with the Bank, the same would be returned to the borrower and if any amount is still due to be paid, the borrower would pay the said amount to the Bank. The Bank and the borrower have both agreed for making the said adjustments. 13. In view of the above discussion and analysis, the following directions are issued: a) setting aside of the auction sale is affirmed. ....