NANI GOPAL PAUL versus T. PRASAD SINGH AND ORS.

NANI GOPAL PAUL versus T. PRASAD SINGH AND ORS.

The Supreme Court held that due to the obvious and manifest illegality in the conduct and confirmation of the auction sale by the single judge, including acceptance of lower offers and improper procedure, the sale and its confirmation were vitiated and must be set aside, even if no proper application under Order 21 Rule 89 or 90 was made within limitation.

Parties
Appellant: Nani Gopal Paul; Respondents: T. Prasad Singh and others; Respondent: Respondent in No. 4
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
06 March 1995
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court From Calcutta High Court Judgment Dated 2.3.94
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Court Auction Sale, Confirmation of Sale, Foreclosure, Limits of Appellate Jurisdiction
Civil Procedure Property Law Court Auction Sale Confirmation of Sale Foreclosure Limits of Appellate Jurisdiction

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nani Gopal Paul

Appellant

T. Prasad Singh and others

Respondents

Respondent in No. 4

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court From Calcutta High Court Judgment Dated 2.3.94

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the manner of conducting and confirming the auction sale was illegal
  2. 2 Whether confirmation of sale could be set aside by appellate court suo motu

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that due to the obvious and manifest illegality in the conduct and confirmation of the auction sale by the single judge, including acceptance of lower offers and improper procedure, the sale and its confirmation were vitiated and must be set aside, even if no proper application under Order 21 Rule 89 or 90 was made within limitation.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Sale and confirmation of sale on 29.8.90 set aside
  • Appeal remanded to High Court for fresh sale by open auction after due publication