Confirmed auction sale and redemption rights: belated objections without statutory deposit cannot unsettle a completed sale.

A confirmed statutory auction sale was not set aside because the objections were raised belatedly, no satisfactory explanation for the delay was shown, and no prejudice from the alleged procedural defects was demonstrated. The sale proclamation had been issued, the reserve price and EMD clerical error was corrected by corrigendum, and the objectors did not pursue the prescribed remedy by depositing the amount required to challenge the sale. After deposit of the bid amount and confirmation of sale in favour of the bank, the mortgagors' right of redemption did not survive, and a later willingness to pay could not undo the completed sale.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the auction sale and its confirmation were liable to be set aside for alleged non-compliance with the sale proclamation procedure and alleged non-service of notice, despite the objections being raised belatedly and without deposit of the amount required for setting aside the sale; (ii) Whether the mortgagors retained any enforceable right of redemption after the sale had been conducted, the bid amount deposited, and the sale confirmed in favour of the bank.

Issue (i): Whether the auction sale and its confirmation were liable to be set aside for alleged non-compliance with the sale proclamation procedure and alleged non-service of notice, despite the objections being raised belatedly and without deposit of the amount required for setting aside the sale.

Analysis: The objections were raised at the last stage, just before the scheduled auction, without any satisfactory explanation for the delay. The sale proclamation had been issued, the clerical mistake in the reserve price/EMD figure was corrected by corrigendum, and no prejudice was shown to have been caused. The petitioners did not avail the statutory remedy for setting aside the sale under the applicable rules by depositing the amount recoverable. The concurrent authorities had already rejected the objections on facts, and the writ court found no basis to disturb those findings or to permit new objections not earlier raised.

Conclusion: The challenge to the sale procedure failed, and the objections were rightly rejected.

Issue (ii): Whether the mortgagors retained any enforceable right of redemption after the sale had been conducted, the bid amount deposited, and the sale confirmed in favour of the bank.

Analysis: Once the sale was confirmed after deposit of the requisite amount, the auction purchaser acquired a vested and absolute right in the property. The petitioners participated in the proceedings throughout, did not challenge the confirming orders, and could not defeat the completed sale by a mere assertion of willingness to pay at a later stage. The right of redemption, on these facts, could not survive against the completed statutory sale.

Conclusion: No enforceable right of redemption survived after confirmation of the sale.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition failed on all material grounds, and the concurrent orders upholding the sale were left undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: A confirmed statutory auction sale, completed after deposit of the requisite amount and absent timely, procedurally compliant objection with demonstrated prejudice, vests an absolute right in the purchaser and cannot be upset by belated collateral challenge.

---