9911796707
TMI Blog1956 (10) TMI 25X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duly conducted on those dates by Messrs. G. D. Khanna and Sons, Government Auctioneers. The highest bid of Rs. 1,40,000 was made by a combine consisting of Puran Chand, Hem Raj, Hans Raj and Ram Krishen, who are the present petitioners, and who deposited Rs. 35,000 in accordance with the conditions of the sale. On the 1st of October, the official liquidator, Mr. D.D. Dhawan, appeared before me for directions in this matter and in his report he mentioned that he had received a subsequent offer of Rs. 1,50,000 from one Harbanslal Chadha of Dehra Dun, and he added that the bid of Rs. 1,40,000 was both very much less then the bank's charge on the property and also less than the market value of the property. In these circumstances, accepting ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ur joint bidders to make a higher offer, but in the circumstances he recommended that the bid of Harbanslal Chadha should be accepted and the sale confirmed in his favour. In these circumstances on the morning of the 8th of October, I passed an order confirming the bid of Harbanslal Chadha for Rs. 1,50,000 and directing that the sale certificate should be issued in his name or in the name of his nominee after the balance of the purchase price had been paid. Later the same morning first Mr. Roop Chand appeared before me representing that the joint bidders had telephoned to him saying that they were prepared to make a higher offer, and then a letter and a telegram to the same effect arrived from them. I advised Mr. Roop Chand to put in a form ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ir offer and prepared to make it when the sale was being conducted on the 6th of October. They make a great deal out of their grievance that the sale was not continued after 1 p.m. on the 6th of October, but it is quite clear that in fact they were not prepared to make a bid at all on that date and wanted the sale to be continued on the 7th. It does not seem to me that the authorities cited on behalf of the petitioners are at all applicable to the facts of the present case whereas a number of cases cited by Mr. D.K. Mahajan on behalf of the auction purchaser are much more to the point. In Soundararajan and Others v. Khaka Mahomed Ismail Saheb AIR 1940 Mad. 42 certain property had been ordered by the court to be sold subject to a res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uance of the court's express sanction. In Brindraban Aggarwala v. Official Liquidator, Saraswati Soap and Oil Mills Ltd. [1952] 22 Comp. Cas. 75 Mootham and Sapru JJ. held that where property was sold by an official liquidator subject to confirmation by the court, the subsequent offer of a higher bid should not be a ground for refusing confirmation of the sale provided the price was adequate. In the present case I feel that I should only be justified in setting aside my own order confirming the sale if any fraud were proved, but such is not the case, since it was both mentioned by the official liquidator in his written report, and also told to me orally at the time when I passed the order, that the four joint bidders had been making ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
