HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M Review Petition No. 5 of 2009 Post for Order on gaday of August, 2009. tish is( Agnihetn a .. Judge S Petitioner M/s Indian Rajnandgaon Applicant/ Intervener Versus Responents/ 1. Petitioner Respondsnt No. l to 5 (Application for Review of the order dated 14.1.2009 passed in W. P. No. 5666/2005) M/ s Indian Poultry Farm, Rajnandgaon, through its authorized signatory Shri Mahsin Ali, son of Late Shamsher Ali, aged about 32 years, resident of Rajendfa Nagar, Nagar, Bilaspur (C.G.) D. S. Dhillon, aged about 50 years, son of Late Shri S. Ajaib Singh, Civil Construction Work, Be 14, Sector n 2, Devendra Nagar, Raipur (CG) National Textile Corporation (M.P.) Limited through its General Manager, NTC House, 27, Yashwant Niwas Road, Indore (M.P.) The Asset Sale Committee of NTC (MP) Limited, constituted under the orders of BIFR, through its Chairman and Managing Director, National Textile Corporation Limited, Core IV, Scope Complex, IV, — 7, Lodhi Road, New Delhi 110 003. Shri K. P. Sharma, Officer on Special Duty, Bengal Nagpur Cotton Mills, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) The Union of India, through the Secretary, Govt. of India, Ministry of Textiles, Udyog Bhawan, Rafi Marg, New Delhi 1 10001. M/s. Shen Zen Properties Private Limited, HR. 15, Sharma Market, Pul Pehladpur, New Delhi 110 O44, through its Managing Director, Shri Rajeev Agrawal. Shri Rajeev Shrivastava, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri N. K. Vyas, Advocate for the respondents No. 2 to 5. None for the respondents No. 1 and 6. Shri Sanjay K. Agarwal, Advocate for the Municipal Corporation, Rajnandgaon. None for the Intervener M/ s Dilip Construction Co. Raipur. ORDER 1. The review petitioner, seeks review of the order dated 14.142009, passed by this Court in W. P. N0. 5666 of 2005 ( D. S. Dhillon Vs. National Textile Corporation (MP) Limited 8r. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR Review Petition No. 5 of 2009 (Passed on this gi‘kday of August, 2009) d others), wherein the review petitioner was auction purchaser in the auction held on 3.1.2008 by the authorized officer, appointed by this Court. Learned counsel appearing for the review petitioner would submit that the Cresent Landcon Pvt. Ltd. Delhi and M/s Dilip Construction Co. Raipur had moved an application before this Court under Order 21 Rule 66 read with Rule 9O and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for setting aside the auction proceedings dated 3.1.2008 held by the Registrar (Vigilance)/Authorized Officer for conducting the auction proceedings. This Court by order dated 14m January, 2009 disposed of the W.P.No. 5666/2005 with the observation that the offer of the highest bidder i.e. M/ s Indian Poultry Farm, Rajnandgaon — the review petitioner, was just and proper. The auction report submitted by the Registrar (Vigilance) was accepted and the same was confirmed. The review petitioner tiled reply to the above applications that though the auction purchaser has deposited the auction amount i.e. Rs. 12.51 crores but the possession of the property has not been delivered to the review petitioner and prayed for depositing the amount in any interest bearing account of any nationalized bank. This Court by order dated 19.3.2008 directed for deposit of the auction amount in any interest bearing account of any nationalized bank. Till date possession of the property has not been handed over to the review petitioner. Thus, the review petitioner has prayed that the interest earned on the amount deposited by the auction did iiiWW W purchaser should be returned to it and the amount of auction purchase can be released in favour of the respondent No.2 National Textile Corporation only after compliance of Order 21 Rule 95 of the C.P,C. In para 13 of the review petition, the review petitioner submitted as under: “13. It is most humble and respectful submission of the applicant herein that proceedings under Order 21 Rule 95 is yet to take place and during that proceedings occasion may arise to decide the applications, if filed any, under Order 21 Rules 96, 97 83 101 of the CPC. Therefore, till the completion of proceeding under Order 21 Rule 95 of CPC, the amount deposited by the auction purchaser may not be released in favour of respondent No.1. National Textile Corporation. Therefore, the necessity of this petition.” «Mm.» Shri N. K. Vyas, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 2 to 5 would submit that there is no error in the order dated 14.1.2009, sought to be reviewed, as the National Textile Corporation was entitled to the interest on the payment made by the review petitioner. I have perused the order dated 14.1.2009 carefully and heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. The question is asto whether the National Textile Corporation would be entitled to interest on the auction amount without handing over the vacant and peaceful possession of the property in question. It appears that the other bidders namely Dilip Construction Company, Raipur and Cresent Landcon Pvt. Ltd., Delhi, who deposited Rs. 50 Lacs each, as earnest money, were ordered to withdraw the amount with interest. The order dated 14.1.2009 for payment of interest on 12.51 crores to the National Textile Corporation, it appears to be apparent error in para 9 of the order, sought to be reviewed. The National Textile Corporation would not be entitled to any interest until and unless the property in question is handed over to the review petitioner. Accordingly, the order dated 14.1.2009 passed by this Court in W.P.No. 5666 of 2005 is modified to the extent that the auction amount of Rs. 12.51 crores shall be released in favour of the National Textile Corporation, without interest, on handing over the vacant and'peaceful possession of the property to the review petitioner. The interest accrued on the said amount, which was kept pending with the Registry, shall be released to the review petitioner i.e. M/s Indian Poultry Farm, Rajnandgaon. It is further directed that the Registrar (Vigilance) shall issue the required certificate of purchase for the vacant and peaceful possession of the property in dispute to the review petitioner at the earliest. The order dated 14.1.2009 with regard to payment of the earnest money of Rs. 50 lacs each, with interest, to Dilip Construction Company, Raipur and Cresent Landcon Pvt. Ltd., Delhi is not modified. 10. The review petition is allowed to the above extent. The order dated 6.2.2009 is vacated. No order asto costs. ‘ sci/- Thakur {fl K. Agn3hQ Satish Judge