9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
Appeal against judgment of Madras High Court regarding sale of property under Tamil Nadu Revenue Recovery Act, 1894. Issue 1 - Publication of Date and Place of Sale: The appellant contended that the sale was invalid due to the absence of the place of sale in the publication, as mandated by Sec. 36. The High Court held that the omission did not render the sale invalid, interpreting that Form 7A did not prescribe the place of sale. However, the Supreme Court emphasized that the publication of the date and place of sale is crucial for inviting bidders and ensuring fairness in public auctions. The Court ruled that the omission of the place of sale rendered the sale not just irregular but also invalid, as specified under Sec. 36. Issue 2 - Deposit of Sale Amount: Another contention was the non-compliance with the requirement to remit the balance of the sale amount within 30 days from the auction date, as mandated by Sec. 36. The appellant argued that the confirmation of the sale without this compliance was illegal. The Supreme Court agreed, stating that failure to deposit the balance amount within the stipulated time rendered the 15% deposit liable to forfeiture. The Court held that the sale was vitiated by this error of law and upheld the decision of the Appellate Authority to set aside the sale confirmation, overturning the judgments of the High Court. In conclusion, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, dismissed the writ petition, and restored the order of the Appellate Authority. The parties were directed to bear their own costs throughout the legal proceedings.
|
