Third-party ownership claims over attached property must be heard on merits before recovery sale proceeds.

A recovery authority proceeding against attached property must hear a third party's objection where independent ownership is claimed, allow proof of title, and decide the matter on merits before continuing with sale. The authority acts under the Land Revenue Act and is bound by natural justice; it cannot dismiss such an objection without determining whether the property belongs to the claimant or the defaulter. The impugned dismissal was therefore unsustainable, and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the recovery authority was bound to hear and decide on merits the petitioner's objection that the attached house belonged to her and not to the defaulter.

Analysis: The house had been attached in sales tax recovery proceedings on the assumption that a partner of the defaulter firm owned it. The objection asserted independent title in the petitioner. In such recovery proceedings, the authority acts under the Land Revenue Act and is governed by the principles of natural justice. Where a third party claims ownership of attached property, the authority must hear the objection, permit proof of title, and decide the matter on merits before proceeding with sale.

Conclusion: The recovery authority had jurisdiction to entertain and decide the objection on merits, and the impugned dismissal of the objection was unsustainable.

Final Conclusion: The dismissal of the objection was set aside and the matter was remitted to the recovery authority for fresh consideration in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: A recovery authority conducting sale proceedings must afford a third party claiming ownership of attached property an effective hearing and determine the objection on merits before continuing with recovery steps.

---