https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108476 The statutory scheme governing recovery proceedings preserves a third party's right to sue after rejection of a claim to attached property, so the civil court remained competent to entertain the partition suit and grant interim protection against recovery action. The challenge based on lack of jurisdiction therefore failed, and supervisory interference under Article 227 was not the proper course. A sale conducted while an interim suspension of the injunction was operating could not be sustained, because the record showed the auction was postponed, the earnest money was returned, and no fresh auction date was notified before the sale. The sale was treated as non est and incapable of being acted upon. en-us Mon, 03 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 Mar 2012 17:28:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108476 The statutory scheme governing recovery proceedings preserves a third party's right to sue after rejection of a claim to attached property, so the civil court remained competent to entertain the partition suit and grant interim protection against recovery action. The challenge based on lack of jurisdiction therefore failed, and supervisory interference under Article 227 was not the proper course. A sale conducted while an interim suspension of the injunction was operating could not be sustained, because the record showed the auction was postponed, the earnest money was returned, and no fresh auction date was notified before the sale. The sale was treated as non est and incapable of being acted upon. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 03 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108476