Confirmed liquidation sale upheld where no fraud or irregularity was shown and a belated higher offer could not displace the bid.

Intervention in company liquidation sale proceedings was refused where the assets had been marketed over a long period through public notice, valuation, a sale committee and negotiations with notified bidders, and the appellant had not participated at the relevant stage or proved a timely offer received by the Official Liquidator. In the absence of fraud, collusion or any irregularity in the sale process, a belated and only marginally higher offer was insufficient to disturb a confirmed sale already approved to secure the best possible price for creditors. The challenge to the sale proceedings therefore failed, and the confirmed bid in favour of the successful bidder was not interfered with.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to intervene in the sale proceedings and whether the confirmed sale in favour of the successful bidder should be interfered with on the ground that the appellant offered a slightly higher price.

Analysis: The assets of the company in liquidation had been offered for sale over a long period, with public notice, valuation, constitution of a sale committee, and negotiations with the notified bidders. The appellant had not participated at the relevant stage and failed to produce reliable proof of any timely offer having been received by the Official Liquidator. No allegation of fraud or collusion was made. In the absence of any irregularity in the sale process, a marginally higher offer made belatedly was insufficient to displace the confirmed bid, particularly when the Company Court had already taken effective steps to secure the best possible price for creditors.

Conclusion: The appellant was not entitled to intervention or to have the confirmed sale disturbed, and the challenge to the sale proceedings failed.

---