E-auction irregularities in insolvency sale notice justified setting aside the auction for bidder prejudice and confusion.

Conflicting timelines in the sale notice, publication over a holiday weekend, and the absence of meaningful time for inspection, due diligence and funding arrangements rendered the e-auction process materially irregular. The later corrigendum could not cure defects after the auction had concluded, and the liquidator's explanation for immediate completion was rejected. On these facts, the auction was validly set aside, and the direction that the liquidator bear the auction and re-auction expenses was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the e-auction conducted by the liquidator was vitiated by haste, conflicting timelines in the sale notice, and lack of adequate opportunity to prospective bidders, warranting setting aside of the auction and confirmation of the impugned order.

Analysis: The sale notice contained conflicting dates for submission of EoI, KYC documents, EMD, and the e-auction itself. The notice was issued on a holiday weekend, leaving only one working day for participation, due diligence, and arranging funds. No meaningful time was provided for inspection of the property. The corrigendum was published after the auction had already concluded, so it could not cure the defect. In these circumstances, the auction process was not considered a mere typographical mishap but a hurried process causing confusion and prejudice to prospective bidders. The liquidator's justification for immediate completion of the sale was not accepted, and the auction was found to suffer from material irregularities.

Conclusion: The e-auction was validly set aside, and the direction that the liquidator bear the auction and re-auction expenses was upheld. The appeals failed.

---