https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183369 In a public auction, the highest bid and partial deposit created only an offer; no vested right or concluded contract arose until acceptance by the competent authority was made and communicated. The Assistant Housing Commissioner was not shown to have delegated authority to accept the bid or bind the Board, and mere conduct of the auction was only a ministerial function. The suit was also not maintainable for want of mandatory notice under Section 88(2), and declaratory relief under the Specific Relief Act could not be granted in the absence of an existing legal right. The auction did not result in a binding allotment. en-us Thu, 18 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 25 Jul 2023 10:56:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183369 In a public auction, the highest bid and partial deposit created only an offer; no vested right or concluded contract arose until acceptance by the competent authority was made and communicated. The Assistant Housing Commissioner was not shown to have delegated authority to accept the bid or bind the Board, and mere conduct of the auction was only a ministerial function. The suit was also not maintainable for want of mandatory notice under Section 88(2), and declaratory relief under the Specific Relief Act could not be granted in the absence of an existing legal right. The auction did not result in a binding allotment. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 18 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183369