https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443933 Strict compliance with Rule 9(4) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 is required for payment of the balance purchase price in a secured asset auction, and the extended period cannot exceed three months. The auction purchaser failed to show that the later deposits matched the time extension granted or that the amount payable, including interest, had been correctly computed. The Supreme Court held that Article 142 of the Constitution and Section 148 of the Code of Civil Procedure cannot be used to override the express statutory time limit, and that repeated miscellaneous applications seeking substantive relief in a disposed of appeal were not maintainable. The direction for issuance of the sale certificate was therefore refused. en-us Wed, 04 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Oct 2023 08:15:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443933 Strict compliance with Rule 9(4) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 is required for payment of the balance purchase price in a secured asset auction, and the extended period cannot exceed three months. The auction purchaser failed to show that the later deposits matched the time extension granted or that the amount payable, including interest, had been correctly computed. The Supreme Court held that Article 142 of the Constitution and Section 148 of the Code of Civil Procedure cannot be used to override the express statutory time limit, and that repeated miscellaneous applications seeking substantive relief in a disposed of appeal were not maintainable. The direction for issuance of the sale certificate was therefore refused. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 04 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443933