https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113412 An auction purchaser who accepted a court-sanctioned sale on an as is where is basis, with knowledge of existing occupation and resumed status of the plot, could not later rescind the transaction or seek refund merely because full possession was delayed. The record showed that the purchaser knew the encumbrances from the outset, obtained possession of the vacant portion, and repeatedly sought to defer payment and alter the bargain while withholding the balance consideration. The order cancelling the sale and directing refund with interest was found unsustainable because it ignored these material facts and the purchaser's contractual obligations. The sale terms remained binding and the outstanding amounts had to be cleared. en-us Fri, 07 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Oct 2014 17:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113412 An auction purchaser who accepted a court-sanctioned sale on an as is where is basis, with knowledge of existing occupation and resumed status of the plot, could not later rescind the transaction or seek refund merely because full possession was delayed. The record showed that the purchaser knew the encumbrances from the outset, obtained possession of the vacant portion, and repeatedly sought to defer payment and alter the bargain while withholding the balance consideration. The order cancelling the sale and directing refund with interest was found unsustainable because it ignored these material facts and the purchaser's contractual obligations. The sale terms remained binding and the outstanding amounts had to be cleared. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 07 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113412