Name of the case:Union Bank of India Vs. Rajat Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. and M/s. Sunview Assets Pvt. Ltd.

Case Number: [Civil Appeal No. 1902 of 2020]

Name of Judges: Hon’ble Judges Bela M. Trivedi, J. and Aniruddha Bose

Order Date: 04/10/2023

Facts of the Case:

• The case involves a property located in Indore, and there are various parties involved: a bank (Union Bank of India), borrowers, and the property owner (Rajat Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.).
• The property was auctioned because of financial problems related to the borrowers not repaying their loans. between the bank and the borrowers. This auction happened under a law called the SARFAESI Act, which deals with recovering loans.
• The applicant, M/s. Sunview Assets Pvt. Ltd., claims that they were the highest bidder in this auction, offering around Rs. 65.62 crores for the property.
• The applicant faced difficulties in meeting payment deadlines for the property due to the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, they sought extensions.
• The court issued several orders granting extensions for payment. However, despite these extensions, the applicant still couldn’t meet the payment deadlines.
• The main issue is whether the applicant’s request for a sale certificate, essentially confirming their purchase of the property, is legally valid or “maintainable.”

The Hon’ble Supreme Court Observed and Held as Follows:

• The court ruled that the applicant’s application for a sale certificate wasn’t legally valid or maintainable.
• The court also expressed concern about the increasing practice of filing multiple applications after a final judgment is given, without legal justification.
• The court also expressed concern about the increasing practice of filing multiple applications after a final judgment is given, without legal justification.
• The court suggested that the applicant should explore other legal remedies or initiate appropriate proceedings to seek a refund of the amount they had already deposited in connection with the property