Liquidation auction bidders are bound by accepted terms; later amendment could not revive time for payment or prevent forfeiture.

A successful bidder in a liquidation auction is bound by the auction notice and bidding conditions accepted on participation. An amendment requiring disclosure of an extension beyond ninety days in the auction notice was held to operate prospectively and could not apply to a process already initiated and concluded. The bidder therefore had no entitlement to a later extension of time to pay the balance sale consideration. Because the bidding document expressly provided for cancellation and forfeiture on default, failure to pay within the stipulated period attracted that contractual consequence. The forfeiture of amounts already paid was upheld, and the challenge failed on both counts.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the successful bidder was entitled to extension of time to pay the balance sale consideration under the amended liquidation regulations. (ii) Whether the liquidator's forfeiture of the amounts already paid on default was liable to be set aside.

Issue (i): Whether the successful bidder was entitled to extension of time to pay the balance sale consideration under the amended liquidation regulations.

Analysis: The amendment permitting disclosure of an extension beyond ninety days in the auction notice was held to be prospective in operation. It was meant to be incorporated in the auction notice at the time of initiation of the process and could not be applied retrospectively to an auction notice issued and concluded before the amendment came into force. The bidder was therefore governed by the terms of the auction document and the payment schedule already accepted by participation in the process.

Conclusion: The request for extension of time was rejected and the finding is against the appellant.

Issue (ii): Whether the liquidator's forfeiture of the amounts already paid on default was liable to be set aside.

Analysis: The bidding document expressly provided that failure to pay the balance consideration within the stipulated period would result in cancellation of the sale and forfeiture of all amounts paid till then. A bidder who voluntarily participates in the auction is bound by the terms of the bidding document and cannot, after obtaining the benefit of successful bidding, challenge those terms as arbitrary. Since the balance amount was not paid within time, the contractual consequence of forfeiture followed.

Conclusion: The forfeiture was upheld and the finding is against the appellant.

Final Conclusion: The appellate challenge failed on both counts, and the impugned order refusing extension of time and sustaining forfeiture was maintained.

Ratio Decidendi: A successful bidder in a liquidation auction is bound by the auction notice and bidding conditions, and an amendment requiring disclosure of extended payment time operates prospectively; default within the stipulated payment period attracts the contractual consequence of cancellation and forfeiture.

---