#e-auction

The Jharkhand High Court ordered the bank to pay 6% per annum interest on the Rs 30.90 million e-auction refund, finding that keeping the money without a sale certificate constituted unjust enrichment and that the bank’s undertaking was void for duress. The ruling strengthens restitution duties for banks under the SARFAESI Act and protects auction bidders.

Andhra Pradesh High Court rules that Debt Recovery Tribunals must adjudicate stay applications under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act before proceeding with e-auctions of mortgaged properties. The judgment reinforces that coercive measures without prior adjudication violate principles of natural justice and property rights under Article 300-A.

NCLAT has ruled that a technical failure in the e-auction platform excluding a bonafide bidder undermines the core IBC principle of value maximization, rendering the sale void. The liquidator’s duty to ensure fair, transparent, and non-discriminatory bidding cannot be outsourced to flawed systems - this sets a precedent for all future liquidation auctions under the Code.

The Calcutta High Court has ruled that even when an RFP permits automatic debarment, authorities cannot blacklist a bidder without first investigating allegations of bid rigging and providing a show-cause notice. This sets a critical precedent for public procurement, ensuring that procedural fairness overrides contractual clauses that circumvent fundamental rights to hearing and fair investigation.