MACT | Fraud Vitiates All Judicial Acts, Even Without Specific Review Powers: Rajasthan High Court    |     Right of Private Defense Cannot Be Weighed in Golden Scales: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Appellant in Culpable Homicide Case    |     Pre-Arrest Bail Not a Right but an Exception: Himachal High Court Denied Bail In Dowry Death Case"    |     Service Law | Similarly Situated Employees Cannot Be Denied Equal Treatment: PH High Court Orders Regularization    |     Presumption of Innocence Remains Supreme Unless Clearly Overturned: PH High Court Affirming Acquittal    |     Any Physical Liaison with A Girl Of Less Than Eighteen Years Is A Strict Offense.: Patna High Court Reiterates Strict Stance On Sexual Offences Against Minors    |     Orissa High Court Rules Res Judicata Inapplicable When Multiple Appeals Arise from Same Judgment    |     Mandatory Section 80 Notice Cannot Be Bypassed Lightly:  Jammu & Kashmir High Court Returns Plaint for Non-Compliance    |     Bombay High Court Denies Permanent Lecturer Appointment for Failing to Meet UGC Eligibility Criteria at Time of Appointment    |     Deferred Cross-Examination Gave Time for Witness Tampering, Undermining Fair Trial: Allahabad High Court    |     Dowry Death | Presumption Under Section 113-B Not Applicable as No Proof of Cruelty Soon Before Death : Supreme Court    |     Land Acquisition | Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. (JAL) Liable for Compensation under Supplementary Award, Not Ultra-Tech Cement Ltd.: Supreme Court    |     Non-Mentioning of Bail Orders in Detention Reflects Clear Non-Application of Mind: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Order    |     Conviction Under Arms Act and Criminal Conspiracy Quashed Due to Non-Seizure of Key Evidence and Failure to Prove Ownership of Box: Jharkhand High Court    |    

Auction Sale Bound by Final Outcome of Appeal – Delhi High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has held that the auction sale of a property will remain bound by the final outcome of the pending appeal. The decision came in the case of Sushil Kumar Chadha vs Canara Bank & Ors., concerning the release of title deeds of a property auctioned by Canara Bank.

Legal Point of Judgement: The court’s judgement revolved around the legality of the auction sale of a property and the obligations of both the auction purchaser and the bank in such proceedings. Central to this was the compliance with Rules 60 and 61 of the Second Schedule of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Facts and Issues: The petitioner, Sushil Kumar Chadha, acquired a property through an auction sale which was later challenged by the deceased original owners in an appeal before the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT). Despite being in physical possession since 2008, the legality of the auction and subsequent sales came under scrutiny.

Misrepresentation and Legal Compliance: The court observed that the petitioner may have misrepresented the status of the auction sale and failed to comply with the court’s earlier direction to inform subsequent purchasers about the pending litigation.

Role of Canara Bank: The court scrutinized the bank’s conduct, especially regarding its incorrect submission about the appeal’s status as abated, highlighting the need for strict compliance with legal procedures in auction sales.

Expedited Appeal Hearing: Recognizing the lengthy delay since the appeal’s filing in 2008, the court directed an expedited hearing of the pending appeal.

Decision of the Judgement: The court ruled that the auction sale of the property shall remain bound by the final outcome of the pending appeal. It was directed that any further sale of the property during the pendency of the appeal should clearly mention the ongoing litigation in the sale documents. The court disposed of the related applications and dismissed the contempt petition, finding no grounds for initiating contempt proceedings.

Date of Decision – 19th February, 2024

Shri Sushil Kumar Chadha vs Canara Bank & Ors.

Similar News