Court sale set aside for manifest illegality, with remand for fresh open auction and lawful publication.

A court sale vitiated by manifest illegality in the conduct of the sale process may be set aside by the appellate court even without the usual procedural challenge. The Court found that the sale had been conducted without proper scrutiny of competing offers and was irregular and illegal, so the confirmation of the sale could not stand. Relief was confined to the legality of the sale process, and the Court declined to express any view on independent rights in the property. The sale and its confirmation were set aside, and the matter was remanded for a fresh open auction with due publication in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the court sale and its confirmation were liable to be set aside on account of illegality in the manner of conducting the sale, and whether the matter required remand for a fresh sale in accordance with law.

Analysis: The sale had been brought about without proper scrutiny of competing offers and in a manner found to be irregular and illegal. The existence of manifest illegality in the conduct of a court sale justified interference even though a formal application under the Code of Civil Procedure had not been pursued in the usual course. The court emphasised that appellate courts need not remain passive when a court sale is patently vitiated. At the same time, the Court declined to express any opinion on the independent rights, if any, of the respondents in the property and confined relief to the legality of the sale process.

Conclusion: The sale and its confirmation were set aside, and the matter was remanded for a fresh sale by open auction with due publication in accordance with law.

Final Conclusion: The decision annulled the earlier court sale process and restored the matter to the High Court for a lawful resale, without determining any separate title or remedy claims beyond the foreclosure suit.

Ratio Decidendi: A court sale that is vitiated by manifest illegality in the conduct of the sale process may be interfered with by the appellate court even in the absence of the usual procedural challenge, and such a sale cannot be allowed to stand.

---