Case Details

Citation(s)
2005 SLG 1206 2005 SLD 1206 2005 SCMR 746
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No.3931-L of 2002, decision dated: 17-12-2002
MUNIR A. SHEIKH, FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR AND KARAMAT NAZIR BHANDARI, JJ

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

Messrs MASOOM INDUSTRIES and others

VS

. HABIB BANK LIMITED and another

Law:

Section:

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)------S. 47 & O.XXI, R.66---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)---Proclamation of sale---Conducting auction on the date other than the date specified by Executing Court---Setting aside of such auction---Non-deciding of objection petition---Date fixed for auction by Executing Court was 11-5-2000, whereas the auction took place on 13-5-2000---Grievance of -debtor was that without deciding objection petition filed by him, the Executing Court confirmed the auction---Plea raised by the -debtor was that there were many intended buyers who could not take part due to non-conducting of auction on the date specified by Executing Court---Validity---If auction as per schedule given by Executing Court was not notified to take place on 11-5-2000, there was no question of any person as intending purchaser to have come to know that the property was going to be auctioned on 11-5-2000---Even if such purchaser knew about schedule of the Court that the property would be auctioned on 11-5-2000, and if he had approached the auctioneer of the Court, he would have known that the property was scheduled to be auctioned by the auctioneers on 13-5-2000---Even if the objection petition had been restored and the grounds urged therein were taken into consideration, the same were not sufficient grounds under the law for setting aside the auction itself as the property was not auctioned earlier to the date fixed by the Court but two days later which did not adversely affect the auction proceedings---Decree was passed as far back as 1998, and the -debtor did not make any effort to pay the decretal amount or any part thereof despite lapse of five years---Sale of the property, in the present auction proceedings which had been confirmed, had been held to have been made by publication of due notice by the auctioneers as required by law---Sale of the property and auction proceedings did not suffer from any illegality justifying interference by Supreme Court---Leave to appeal was refused. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. XXI, R. 66---Sale by auction---Date---Bona fide mistake of Court officials---Judgment-debtor sought setting aside ofโ€ฆ
๐Ÿ”’
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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