https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359230 The court ruled in favor of the auction purchaser, holding that the deposit of the remaining 75% of the auction amount should commence from the date of confirmation of sale, not from the date of the auction. The court emphasized compliance with Rule 9 of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, stating that the auction purchaser had fulfilled the deposit requirements within the specified timeline. As a result, the appeal was allowed, setting aside previous orders and directing the delivery of possession in accordance with the law, thereby upholding the validity of the auction sale. en-us Wed, 21 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Apr 2018 09:35:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359230 The court ruled in favor of the auction purchaser, holding that the deposit of the remaining 75% of the auction amount should commence from the date of confirmation of sale, not from the date of the auction. The court emphasized compliance with Rule 9 of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, stating that the auction purchaser had fulfilled the deposit requirements within the specified timeline. As a result, the appeal was allowed, setting aside previous orders and directing the delivery of possession in accordance with the law, thereby upholding the validity of the auction sale. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 21 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359230