https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183371 An uncommunicated and legally ineffective acceptance of an auction bid did not create an enforceable right to completion of the sale or to an alternate plot. The Court held that a mere file entry and deposit of 25% of the bid amount did not amount to a completed transfer or grant, especially where the property was in a green-belt area and the auction process had already been stayed. Section 43 of the Transfer of Property Act was inapplicable, and the doctrine of feeding the grant by estoppel could not be used to compel a public authority to act contrary to law or public interest. The direction to allot an alternate plot was set aside, though refund with interest was ordered. en-us Fri, 19 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Jun 2016 11:18:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183371 An uncommunicated and legally ineffective acceptance of an auction bid did not create an enforceable right to completion of the sale or to an alternate plot. The Court held that a mere file entry and deposit of 25% of the bid amount did not amount to a completed transfer or grant, especially where the property was in a green-belt area and the auction process had already been stayed. Section 43 of the Transfer of Property Act was inapplicable, and the doctrine of feeding the grant by estoppel could not be used to compel a public authority to act contrary to law or public interest. The direction to allot an alternate plot was set aside, though refund with interest was ordered. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 19 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183371