| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2020 SLG 185 2020 SLD 185 2020 CLC 179 |
Sindh High Court
Constitutional Petitions Nos. D-324 and D-323 of 2017,decision Dated: 26-02-2019. Hearing Dated: 07-02-2019.
SYED HASSAN AZHAR RIZVI, JUSTICE AZIZ-UR-REHMAN, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Muhammad Khalid Nos.2 to 4 (in Constitutional Petition No.D-324 of 2017).
Respondent(s) by: Riaz Ahmed Phulpoto No.8 (in Constitutional Petition No.D-324 of 2017).Junaid Alam Khan for Auction Purchaser (in Constitutional Petition No.D
Constitutional Petitions Nos. D-324 and D-323 of 2017,decision Dated: 26-02-2019. Hearing Dated: 07-02-2019.
SYED HASSAN AZHAR RIZVI, JUSTICE AZIZ-UR-REHMAN, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Muhammad Khalid Nos.2 to 4 (in Constitutional Petition No.D-324 of 2017).
Respondent(s) by: Riaz Ahmed Phulpoto No.8 (in Constitutional Petition No.D-324 of 2017).Junaid Alam Khan for Auction Purchaser (in Constitutional Petition No.D
AHMED ASIF SIDDIQUI AND OTHERSVSIIIRD ADJ EAST KARACHI AND OTHERS
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: S.65,151,O.XXI,XXIX,R.84,85,88,89,90,91, 92
(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. XXI, Rr. 84, 85, 89, 90 & 91 & S. 65---Partition of immovable property---Execution petition---Auction of property---Requirements---Executing Court passed order for holding fresh auction but Appellate Court set aside the same with the direction to complete sale proceedings in favour of auction purchaser---Contention of petitioners-decree holders was that they were ready to purchase the shares of other legal heirs but Court Auctioneer had not mentioned the said offer in his auction report---Validity---Offer of legal heirs in the matter of inheritance should be given preference over the offer of third party subject to the ability to match the highest bidder---Judgment-debtors and decree-holders did not extend their consent in favour of auction purchaser rather they themselves had shown their intention to purchase the subject property for higher amount than the offered amount of auction purchaser---Court or officer holding the sale, if authorized in this regard, had discretion to decline the acceptance of highest bid if offered price was either inadequate and/or otherwise the property under auction/sale had the potential to fetch more price than the offered one---Executing Court was aware with regard to location of the subject property and its market value---Submission of bid did not mature into a contract until and unless same was accepted---Nazir of the Court who was sent execution petition was not competent to accept or refuse any bid---Nazir of the court, in the present case, had acted as an agent of the seller but ex-facie he was not vested with the power either to accept or refuse any of the offers received by him and offer was placed before the Executing Court---Deposit of 25% of the bid amount was subject to its realization---Auction purchaser could not claim any legal/vested right in the subject property mere on the basis of deposit of 25% of the bid amount---No right/title in the auctioned property should be deemed to be created/transferred in favour of any bidder unless bid was forwarded to and accepted by the Court---Once sale was accepted and balance 75% of the bid amount was deposited within fifteen days…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492