9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (2) TMI 428X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... valuable right to have his objections adjudicated upon in accordance with law. The objections were raised much prior to the auction sale and they ought to have been decided before the auction sale took place. Failure to do so vitiated the sale. Respondents 2 and 3 will be at liberty to withdraw the purchase price deposited by them which as informed, is invested in fixed deposits together with accrued interest thereon. - Civil Appeal No. 1644, 1645 of 1980 - - - Dated:- 8-2-1996 - MADAN MOHAN PUNCHHI AND SUJATA V. MANOHAR JJ. G.L. Sanghi, Senior Advocate (Uma Datta, Pramod Dayal and S.K. Gupta, Advocates, with him), for the appellant. S.K. Dholakia and R.K. Jain, Senior Advocate (Arvind Minocha and D.K. Garg, Advocates, with the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the letters received by M/s. Jaswant Sugar Mills from the Oriental Bank of Commerce Ltd., were also enclosed with the said letter. Thereafter, on July 31, 1972, a citation was issued by the Tehsildar, Meerut, on the appellant under section 280 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, calling upon him to pay a sum of Rs. 50,42,523 failing which his property, inter alia, would be attached and sold. Thereafter, the appellant filed his objections dated November 8, 1972, before the sale officer raising various objections to the amount claimed and also pointing out that the shares for which notice of auction was given were already pledged with the Oriental Bank of Commerce Ltd., Meerut, and the Punjab Co-operative Bank, Ne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,000 was deposited by the auction purchasers with the Tehsildar, Meerut, on the date of the auction. On 5th of January, 1974, the auction purchasers wrote a letter to the sale officer asking where they should deposit the balance amount. As per the directions of the sale officer the auction purchasers deposited the balance amount of Rs. 2,15,000 with the Tehsildar, Meerut, on 7th of January, 1974. On 11th of January, 1974, the appellant filed objections to the auction sale before the Collector, Meerut. On 14th of January, 1974, the Oriental Bank of Commerce also filed objections to the auction sale before the Collector, Meerut. On 16th of January, 1974, the District Magistrate, Meerut, passed an order declaring the auction sale as invali ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ovable properties of the debtor. Under section 282, every attachment and sale of movable property shall be made according to the law in force for the time being for the attachment and sale of movable property in execution of a decree of a civil court. Under section 341, unless otherwise expressly provided, the provisions, inter alia, of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, shall apply to the proceedings under this Act. It is not in dispute that the attachment and sale of the appellant's shares had to be in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code. Order XXI, rule 77 provides for sale of movable property by public auction. It provides: "(1) Where movable property is sold by public auction the price of each lot shall be pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eceipt for the same. The auction sale, therefore, cannot be faulted on this ground. The second objection of the appellant, however, deserves to be accepted. It is contended by him that two sets of objections were raised by him to the proposed auction sale when the shares were attached. These objections to the sale were pending when the auction sale took place. These objections go to the root of the liability of the appellant to pay the amounts under the recovery certificate as well as to the saleability of the shares proposed to be sold. These objections ought to have been adjudicated upon before the auction sale. An auction which is held without deciding objections to it is bad in law. Recovery proceedings are equivalent to execution p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pon the objections is a material irregularity which vitiates the sale. The appellant has thereby lost his valuable right to have his objections adjudicated upon in accordance with law. The objections were raised much prior to the auction sale and they ought to have been decided before the auction sale took place. Failure to do so vitiated the sale. The appellant has also contended that on July 3, 1971 Ordinance No. 23 of 1971 known as the U.P. Sugar Undertakings (Acquisition) Ordinance, 1971 was issued. As a result, S.B. Sugar Mills was acquired and the appointed date for vesting of the undertaking was 2nd of July, 1971. This Ordinance was replaced by U.P. Act No. 23 of 1971. The appellant contends that in view of the provisions of the sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
