https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=472369 Article 226 writ jurisdiction could not be invoked to set aside an auction merely on a bidder's claimed confusion over its terms. Separate bids for the land and tower, even when aggregated, remained lower than the successful consolidated bid, undermining the claim of confusion or disturbance. The secured creditor and borrowing company did not challenge the auction process. These circumstances provided no basis to set aside the auction. en-us Tue, 30 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Oct 2026 13:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=472369 Article 226 writ jurisdiction could not be invoked to set aside an auction merely on a bidder's claimed confusion over its terms. Separate bids for the land and tower, even when aggregated, remained lower than the successful consolidated bid, undermining the claim of confusion or disturbance. The secured creditor and borrowing company did not challenge the auction process. These circumstances provided no basis to set aside the auction. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 30 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=472369