Social Icons

Monday, August 3, 2015


In this case, the respondent had participated in an auction conducted by the appellants for disposal of certain booths situated in Sector 9 at Panchkula and had offered the highest bid of Rs. 4 lakhs for booth No. 103 situated in the said sector. As he was the highest bidder, subject to the conditions of the auction, he has allotted the said booth vide Memo No. 12351 dated 14th September, 1988. The respondent had deposited Rs. 40, 000/-, being 10% of the amount of bid, immediately and thereafter he had further deposited a sum of Rs. 60,000/- so as to make 25% of the total amount offered by him.

The balance amount of Rs. 3 lakhs was to be paid by the respondent to the appellant authorities in 10 half yearly instalments along with interest @10% per annum. There was a condition in the auction sale that in case of default in payment, the respondent had to pay interest @10% per annum on the unpaid amount and it was also open to the appellant to impose further amount of penalty and the resume possession of the both.

The Supreme Court held that from the facts it shows that the respondent committed several irregularities in making payment of the remaining amount; respondent is not having bona fide intention and is merely trying to remain in possession without making payment of the bid amount, which he had agreed to pay. It would be open to the appellant to take possession of the booth in question in accordance with law.  [HUDA & another Vs. Kedar Nath; 2015 AIR SCW 3947].

Prepared by: S. Hemanth
Advocate at Hemanth & Associates