# M/S ASJ FINSOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. vs. VIKRAM BAJAJ

> SC judgment dated 2026-09-28. Citation: TCN-2026-SC-00111. The appellant, M/S ASJ FINSOLUTIONS PVT. LTD., was the successful bidder in an e-auction conducted…

- **Court:** SC
- **Order date:** 28 Sept 2026
- **Citation:** TCN-2026-SC-00111
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/supreme-court-of-india/asj-finsolutions-pvt-ltd-vs-vikram-bajaj-uhsl7

## Summary

### Background

The appellant, M/S ASJ FINSOLUTIONS PVT. LTD., was the successful bidder in an e-auction conducted as part of a liquidation process initiated under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The auction was for Lot No.5, a property of the Corporate Debtor. The appellant furnished Earnest Money Deposit (EMD) and a portion of the balance sale consideration. However, they failed to pay the remaining balance within the stipulated 90 days, citing a pending civil suit and requesting prior deeds. The NCLT initially allowed the refund of the forfeited EMD, but the NCLAT reversed this decision, affirming the forfeiture. The appellant then challenged the NCLAT's order before the Supreme Court.

## Facts

M/S ASJ FINSOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. was the successful bidder in an auction conducted in the liquidation process initiated by the Resolution Professional (RP) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

The appellant was aggrieved by the impugned order of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) which reversed the order of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and affirmed the forfeiture of Earnest Money Deposit (EMD).

The forfeiture was for the reason of the successful bidder having not paid the balance sale consideration within 90 days.

An Operational Creditor had approached the NCLT under Section 9 of the IBC, leading to the appointment of an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) and later, the first respondent, Vikram Bajaj, as the RP.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the forfeiture of Earnest Money Deposit (EMD) and other amounts paid by the successful …

**Ratio:** Forfeiture of EMD and other deposits is justified if the successful bidder fails to pay

…

**Reasoning:** The appellant admittedly failed to pay the balance sale consideration within the initial

…

**Interpretation:** The terms of the e-auction notice, particularly the forfeiture clause, are

…

**Application:** The Supreme Court upheld the NCLAT's decision, finding that the forfeiture was

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** K. VINOD CHANDRAN,…; J.B. Pardiw…
- **Appellants:** M/S ASJ FINSOLUTIO…
- **Respondents:** Vikram…
- **Advocates:** Ms.Meenaksh…; Abhishek…

## Timeline

- **2021-10-25 — E-auction noti…**: E-auction notice for sale of Lot No.5 and other properties owned by the Corporate Debtor…
- **2021-11-15 — Auction con…**: The e-auction was…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 9 — Application for initiation of corporate insolvency…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-9)

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/supreme-court-of-india/asj-finsolutions-pvt-ltd-vs-vikram-bajaj-uhsl7