MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

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