Custodial Death | Pendency Of Criminal Trial No Bar For Awarding Compensation Under Public Law Remedy: Gauhati High Court Suit For Possession Under Section 6 Specific Relief Act Barred If Filed Beyond Six Months Of Dispossession: Madras High Court Subsequent Purchaser Is Representative Of Judgment Debtor, Separate Suit Challenging Execution Sale Barred Under Section 47 CPC: Kerala High Court Statutory Bail Restrictions Melt Down When Pre-Trial Detention Is Prolonged & Trial Is Unlikely To Conclude Soon: Delhi High Court Failure To Apprise Accused Of Right Under Section 50 NDPS Act Vitiates Search & Recovery: J&K & Ladakh High Court Section 12(5) Arbitration Act Inapplicable To Proceedings Commenced Before 2015 Amendment; Executing Court Can't Apply Neutrality Norms Retrospectively: Punjab & Haryana High Court Banks Can Share Sale Proceeds Of Secured Assets Outside Liquidation Estate With Homebuyers Under Compromise Agreement: Kerala High Court Private Rights Must Yield To Public Interest: Andhra Pradesh High Court Directs Removal Of Encroachments On Public Road Review Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Re-Agitate Factual Disputes Or Seek Re-Hearing On Merits: Allahabad High Court Recovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act Vitiated If Police Already Present At Spot Before Arrival Of Panch Witnesses: Bombay High Court Mere Non-Compliance Or Delay In Procedure Under Section 52A NDPS Act Is An Irregularity, Not An Illegality Entitling Accused To Bail: Calcutta High Court Recovery Of Weapon Used In Commission Of Offence Not A Sine Qua Non For Conviction If Ocular Evidence Is Corroborated: Allahabad High Court Seized Vehicles Shouldn't Be Kept Idle To Rot In Police Stations, Utility Vanishes Due To Stagnation: Karnataka High Court Or 39 CPC | Trial Court Erred In Dismissing Injunction Application Despite Respondent's 'No Objection' To Restraining Share Transfer: Gauhati High Court Issuing NBW Merely For Absence Of Accused Already On Bail Is Improper; Liberty Cannot Be Dealt With Lightly: Orissa High Court 138 NI | Expert Examination Of Disputed Documents Essential For Just Adjudication If Complainant Denies Handwriting & Signatures: Rajasthan High Court Order 41 Rule 27 CPC Cannot Be Invoked To Fill Lacunae In Evidence If Party Voluntarily Closed Evidence In Trial Court: Delhi High Court

Non-Compliance with Auction Guidelines Renders Property Sale Invalid, Rules Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


On 27 April 2023, The Supreme Court of India, in a recent judgment, has held that the process of auctioning a property must be conducted in accordance with the law, failing which the sale may be deemed illegal. The judgment came in response to two appeals filed before the court, in which the sale of a property belonging to a sick industrial company was challenged on the grounds of non-compliance with legal procedures.

The case concerned M/s Bharat Commerce & Industries Limited (BCI), a sick industrial company whose assets were being sold by the Operating Agency (IDBI) in accordance with the order of the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR). The sale notice invited bids for a property in Rajpura, Punjab, which was ultimately sold to the appellant, Rajiv Kumar Jindal, for Rs. 2.84 crores.

The challenge to the sale was based on the fact that the auction process was defective at its very inception. The reserve price of the property was not disclosed, and no valuation report was obtained from an approved valuer. Moreover, the appellant failed to comply with the guidelines laid down by the Asset Sale Committee (ASC), which indicated that the successful purchaser had to furnish a bank guarantee and pay the balance of the purchase consideration in two instalments.

The Supreme Court held that the auction process must be conducted in accordance with the law and in a manner that maximizes the realizable value of the property. Competitive bidding is essential for achieving this objective, and the guidelines laid down by the ASC must be scrupulously adhered to. In the present case, since the auction process was defective and no competitive bidding took place, the sale was deemed illegal.

The court also held that the later offer made by the appellants was of no legal significance, as they had not participated in the bidding process. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed, and the money deposited by the appellants was ordered to be refunded. The official liquidator was directed to take all reasonable steps to fetch the optimum value of the property in order to achieve the objective of the public auction.

RAJIV KUMAR JINDAL AND OTHERS  VS  BCI STAFF COLONY RESIDENTIAL WELFARE ASSOCIATION AND OTHERS 

Latest Legal News