Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: S.96,35A,O.XX,r.5,O.VI,r.9,O.V,r.20,O.XX III,r.1,O.I,r.9

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: S.96,35A,O.XX,r.5,O.VI,r.9,O.V,r.20,O.XX III,r.1,O.I,r.9

Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 42

Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)-------Ss. 42, 54 & 55---Suit for declaration, permanent and mandatory injunction---Auction of plot---Cancellation of bid of auction---Authority auctioned suit plot and plaintiff was the highest bidder---Terms of auction showed that plaintiff had paid certain amount at the time of auction, whereas according to terms of auction, plaintiff was bound to deposit 25% of total consideration within 48 hours from the auction day, failing which bid was liable to be rejected and 10% of total amount of premium or the deposited amount, whichever was less, would stand forfeited in favour of Authority---Plaintiff having failed to deposit 25 % of total consideration within stipulated period of 48 hours according to terms of auction, his auction was cancelled---Contention of plaintiff was that he could not deposit amount according to terms of auction, because two days after auction of plot, one person filed suit against plaintiff as well as the Authority; and that interim injunction was issued by the civil court in that suit, whereby Authority was directed to refrain alienating suit plot in an illegal manner-Validity-Nowhere in restraining order passed by the civil court in the said suit, plaintiff was restrained from depositing the balance amount of 25 % of the total sale consideration as per terms of auction---Since appellant did not deposit 25% of sale consideration within stipulated period of 48 hours, highest bid offered by the plaintiff, was rightly rejected by the Authority and acceptance was not confirmed in favour of plaintiff---Giving the highest bid which was not accepted, no legal right to grant contract was created in favour of plaintiff---Plaintiff was also not entitled for any notice prior to rejection/cancellation of his bid because same was not accepted by the competent Authority---Trial Court, in circumstances had rightly dismissed the suit filed by plaintiff. 1993, MLD 1976; PLD 1995 Lah. 451; 2000 Law Notes 411; Munshi Muhammad's case 1971 SCMR 533; Rehmat Ali's case 1973 SCMR 342; Meraj Din's case 1970 SCMR 542; Ghulam Nabi and others v. Seth Muhammad Yaqoob PLD 1983 SC 344; 1994 SCMR 2268; PLD 1982 SC 590; Aziz Ullah…

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