Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 42

Law: Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Section: 11, 35-A

 Legal Summary Case: Regular First Appeal against judgment dated 26.12.2014 — Inaam Ameen Minhas, J. Core dispute: Whether the appellant, having been declared the highest bidder for CDA Plot No. 24, F-11 Markaz, Islamabad, acquired an enforceable legal right despite failure to pay the required 25% bid amount and subsequent non-confirmation/rejection of the bid by the CDA Board. Tagline “A highest bidder in an auction acquires no vested or enforceable right in the property until the bid is finally accepted or confirmed by the competent authority.” Consequently, no declaratory relief can be granted where the plaintiff has no pre-existing legal right in the property. ORDER; INAAM AMEEN MINHAS, J.- Through the instant Regular First Appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and decree dated 26.12.2014, rendered by the learned Single Judge in Chambers, exercising original jurisdiction, whereby the suit for Declaration, Permanent Injunction, and Mandatory Injunction filed by the appellant was dismissed. In brief, the facts of the case are as follows: The appellant/plaintiff filed a suit for declaration, permanent injunction, and mandatory injunction against the respondents/defendants/CDA inter alia that respondent No.1/ defendant No.1 offered commercial plots No.23 & 24 for sale through open auction and the appellant being interested, participated in the bid in the name of his daughter and declared the successful purchaser of both plots. The appellant paid an amount of Rs. 20,00,000/- (two million) against token No. 44 and a similar amount of Rs. 20,00,000/- (two million) against token No. 45, towards the total sale consideration of Rs. 443,828,000/- for plot No. 23 and Rs. 423,500,000/-for plot No. 24. The amount was to be transferred from abroad but due to international situation prevailing after 9/11 incident, the appellant faced serious difficulties in transferring the amount. Consequently, the respondents cancelled the bid by forfeiting the token money of Rs.4 million against both the plots through letter dated 05.08.2004. The appellant approached the respondents for reconsideration of the matter for restoration of bid. The…