- (1.) THIS appeal has been preferred by the appellant -Bihar State Financial Corporation only against a portion of the judgment and order dated 28.11.2008* passed in W.P.(C) No. 505 of 2002 alongwith W.P.(C) No. 561 of 2002, by which the order dated 10.1.2002 issued by the Managing Director of the appellant -Corporation forfeiting an amount of Rs. 5 lakhs which had been paid by the petitioner -respondent by way of earnest money for purchasing a unit of a defaulter, which had been put to sale by way of auction was quashed and set aside. The petitioner/appellant - Corporation was directed to refund the amount with interest at the rate of 8%. The appellant - Corporation has assailed this fact of the order by which interest at the rate of 8% has been ordered to be paid.
(2.) IT is an admitted position that the petitioner, respondent herein, did not succeed in paying the entire amount towards auction sale in spite of the fact that the time to make the payment had already expired and thereafter the time was also extended on several occasions by the Corporation to enable the respondent to make the payment. Finally when the respondent -auction purchaser could not discharge the liability of making the payment for purchasing the unit as a successful bidder, his tender was cancelled on 10.1.2002 and the offer was made to another successful bidder on 11.1.2002. However, the learned Single Judge although had been pleased to dismiss the writ petitions, he was further pleased to hold that the forfeiture of the earnest money by the respondent -Corporation was illegal and hence, ordered for refund of the amount of Rs. 5 lakhs which had been deposited as a part payment towards the bid (which has erroneously been described as earnest money in the impugned order which position has been accepted by both the sides) was ordered to be refunded. Since the learned Single Judge was pleased to hold that the Corporation having accepted the amount from the subsequent bidder on 27.12.2001 and had earlier also accepted the amount of Rs. 19.95 lakhs from the respondent no. 4, the appellant could not have accepted a draft of Rs. 5 lakhs on 7.1.2002 from the respondent by extending the period to make the balance payment. The learned Single Judge therefore, was pleased to hold that the action of the respondent -Corporation was clearly unjustified and the forfeiture of the amount of Rs. 5 lakhs, which was deposited by the petitioner, was arbitrary and illegal and hence, it was ordered that the said amount be refunded to the petitioner - respondent. However, it was also ordered to be refunded alongwith interest at the rate of 8% within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the order. The iearned Single Judge, however, did not pass any order in regard to the refund of the amount of earnest money to the tune of Rs. 50,000/ -, which had been deposited.
(3.) IT may be relevant to clarify that although the learned Single Judge has ordered for refund of Rs.;