TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1994 (12) TMI 349
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of attachment on 25th August 1976. The property was auctioned on 15th June 1979 for a sum of ₹ 1,90,000/-. The appellant filed an objection against the sale and claimed that the reserved price of the property being ₹ 6,00,000/- the sale was vitiated as the property was sold in violation of not only the reserved price fixed by the appellant but was contrary to the procedure required to be followed. Objection was filed by the judgment debtor too. The property was purchased by Shri Ajit Jain and four others. The objections were contested by the auction purchasers. The Executing Court dismissed both the objections filed by the appellant and the judgment debtor. The appellant, however, filed an appeal against dismissal of the object....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction purchaser, has entered into possession and is continuing as such since past many years. In view of this we had passed following order: "In execution of decree for ₹ 5,22,585.37, Plot No.360-61 in Industrial Area, Chandigarh along with building constructed thereon and machinery in smiled was sold on 15.6.79 for a consideration of ₹ 1 lakh and 90 thousand. The bank decree holder filed an objection under Order 21 Rule 19 of the C.P.C. claiming various irregularities in auction proceedings. Objections were filed by judgment-debtor as well. Since then the litigation has been going on between the parties and this appeal has been filed by the decree holder against remand order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....m the premises in dispute between 17.3.1979 to 19.9.1984 came to ₹ 7,35,000/-. This itself shows that the sale of the property for a sum of .₹ 1,90,000/- was inadequate. In this context it is necessary to mention that one of the pleas raised by the appellant and the judgment- debtor was that the auction purchaser prevented any bidder from entering the plea of auction. We consider it unnecessary to record any finding on it. But the inadequacies of the amount for which the property was sold coupled with the statement of four of the auction purchasers that the sale was vitiated gives credence to the plea raised on behalf of the appellant. No further need be said. 4. In the circumstances we dispose of these appeals under Article 14....