Section 9 A&C Act Relief Available Until Award Is Actually Enforced, Even After It Becomes Enforceable: Telangana High Court Matrimonial Litigations Must Not Degenerate Into Contests Of Mutual Humiliation By Weaponising Private Images: Delhi High Court Unarmed Witnesses’ Inaction Against Armed Assailants Justified By Instinct Of Self-Preservation; Testimony Cannot Be Discarded: Allahabad High Court Ocular Evidence Outweighs Motive: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Murder Conviction Based On Reliable Eyewitness Testimony Arrest Illegal If Written 'Grounds Of Arrest' Not Furnished To Accused; Communication Of Mere 'Reasons' Insufficient: Bombay High Court Absence Of Territorial Jurisdiction No Ground To Quash FIR At Threshold If Allegations Disclose Cognizable Offence: Calcutta High Court Proof Of Demand Is Sine Qua Non For PC Act Conviction; Voice Recordings Inadmissible Without Sec 65-B Certificate: Chhattisgarh HC Section 91 IEA | Disposition Of Immovable Property Cannot Be Proved By Oral Evidence If Written Document Not Produced: Delhi High Court NRC Legacy Data Extracts Inadmissible Without Section 65B Certificate; PAN Card & EPIC Not Proof Of Citizenship: Gauhati High Court Testimony Of Injured Witness Entitled To Great Weight; Minor Contradictions Due To Lapse Of Memory Cannot Discard Prosecution Case: Himachal Pradesh High Court Section 164 CrPC Statement Recorded Without Procedural Safeguards Or 'Cooling-Off' Period Not A Valid Confession: Jharkhand High Court Anticipatory Bail Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Investigation Is At A Nascent Stage If Custodial Interrogation Is Not Indispensable: Telangana High Court Actual Pay Drawn During Last 10 Months Must Be Basis For Pension Calculation, Regardless Of Notional Pay In Parent Bank: Punjab & Haryana High Court Kerala High Court Remands Teacher Seniority Dispute For Fresh Consideration To Verify If Senior Teacher Relinquished Promotion Claim Receipt Of DNA Report After Testimony Doesn't Automatically Confer Right To Recall Witness For Further Cross-Examination: Madhya Pradesh High Court Possession Of 'Bhang' Not An Offence Under NDPS Act, Specific Definition Excludes It: Jharkhand High Court Acquits Man Trial Court Cannot Reject Request For Handwriting Expert Merely Because Signatures Are On Photocopies: Punjab & Haryana 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