Azad Singh Solanki vs Punjab National Bank on 7 July, 2016

CORAM:-
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW

1. The petition (i) impugns the communication dated 26 th May, 2014 of the

respondent Punjab National Bank (Bank) to the petitioner to the effect that

upon the failure of the petitioner to pay balance 75% of the bid amount within

the prescribed time, the amount deposited by the petitioner till then with the

respondent Bank shall stand forfeited; and, (ii) seeks mandamus to the

respondent Bank to refund the earnest amount of Rs.40,20,000/- to the

petitioner along with interest.

2. The petition came up before this Court first on 28 th July, 2014 when the

counsel for the respondent Bank appearing on advance notice was asked to

obtain instructions whether the respondent Bank was agreeable to refund the

W.P.(C) No.4648/2014 Page 1 of 15
amount forfeited. The counsel for the respondent Bank on 19th November, 2014

informed that the respondent Bank was not so agreeable. Notice of the petition

was issued and pleadings have been completed. On 18th January, 2016 when the

petition came up for hearing, attention of the senior counsel for the petitioner

was invited to the order dated 18th March, 2015 of the Supreme Court in Civil

Appeal No.3053/2015 titled National Highways Authority of India Vs. MEIL-

EDB LLC (JV) quoted by me in CCPL Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. GAIL (India)

Ltd. MANU/DE/4361/2015 and on request of the counsels the matter was

adjourned to 11th February, 2016 when after hearing arguments judgment was

reserved.

Source: Indian Kanoon

Leave a Reply

*