<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2011 (11) TMI 723 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181832</link>
    <description>Mandatory valuation, reserve price fixation, newspaper publication, and timely payment of the balance consideration are treated as essential steps for a valid sale of secured property under the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002. The text states that failure to show a fresh valuation before resale, non-compliance with the notice period, and defective vernacular publication were treated as rendering the auction sale invalid. It also notes that writ jurisdiction may be invoked where the statutory appeal remedy is rendered ineffective on the facts, and that a refusal to examine the legality of the sale procedure can make the Single Judge&#039;s approach unsustainable. The sale was directed to be re-auctioned in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Apr 2016 10:26:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=425211" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (11) TMI 723 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181832</link>
      <description>Mandatory valuation, reserve price fixation, newspaper publication, and timely payment of the balance consideration are treated as essential steps for a valid sale of secured property under the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002. The text states that failure to show a fresh valuation before resale, non-compliance with the notice period, and defective vernacular publication were treated as rendering the auction sale invalid. It also notes that writ jurisdiction may be invoked where the statutory appeal remedy is rendered ineffective on the facts, and that a refusal to examine the legality of the sale procedure can make the Single Judge&#039;s approach unsustainable. The sale was directed to be re-auctioned in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181832</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>