9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 238X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t thereon. The respondent authorities did not put up the property for sale on the condition that, the possession of the property will be made over only after completion of the proceeding before Debts Recovery Tribunal with regard to the property or that the purchase price will not be refunded till disposal of any SARFAESI action. In such circumstances, the respondent authorities are directed to refund the sum of ₹ 1,21,00,000/- to the writ petitioners within a period of seven days from date together with interest calculated at the rate of 12 % per annum on and from the date of receipt of the purchase price until the full payment thereof is made to the writ petitioners. Such rate of interest is awarded keeping in view that, the natu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed, according to the learned Counsel for the respondents, that, the borrower would refund the purchase price along with interest at fixed deposit rate to the purchaser. Learned Counsel for the writ petitioners disputes the contention that, the writ petitioners are not interested in refund of the purchase price together with reasonable interest. He submits categorically that, his clients are willing to take refund of the purchase price together with reasonable interest. He submits that, the transaction in question is in the nature of the commercial transaction and, therefore, the interest awarded must be at the same rate of interest as that charged by a nationalised bank in respect of commercial transaction. He also submits that, no such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the same by a reasoned order. The authorised officer acting in terms of the order dated July 11, 2014, disposed of the demand for justice by the order dated August 20, 2014. The authorised officer found that, the Debts Recovery Tribunal had directed all further developments in respect of the immovable property to abide by the outcome of SA No.747 of 2011. The authorised officer went on to say that on the final decision of the Debts Recovery Tribunal being rendered in SA No. 747 of 2011 and after the permission of the District Magistrate is made available, the physical possession of the property will be handed over to the writ petitioners. I have considered the order dated August 20, 2014. I find no order of the Debts Recovery Tribuna ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es recorded in the order dated August 20, 2014 that, the possession will be made over only after completion of the proceeding before the Debts Recovery Tribunal and permission of the District Magistrate cannot be sustained. The order dated August 20, 2014 so far as it finds that, the direction of the Debts Recovery Tribunal that, the property will be subject to the outcome of SA No. 747 of 2011 is perverse. The writ petitioners have put in a sum of ₹ 1.21 crores with the respondent authorities. The respondent authorities have put up the property for sale in exercise of powers under the SARFAESI Act, 2002. The respondent authorities have conducted the sale in its usual course of business. The transaction, therefore, can only be comm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
