SARDAR NIRMAL SINGH Vs. BHATIA SAFE WORKS AND ORS.
LAWS(SC)-2016-3-32
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: ALLAHABAD)
Decided on March 03,2016

SARDAR NIRMAL SINGH Appellant
VERSUS
Bhatia Safe Works And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) The present appeal, by special leave, is directed against the judgment and order of the learned single Judge of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad passed in Civil Misc. No.54478 of 2004 whereby the said court has affirmed the order of the Board of Revenue which had held that the auction sale made in favour of the appellant was liable to be set aside as there had been non-compliance of Rules 285B and 285C of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition of Land Reforms Rules, 1952 (for short, 'the Rules') and also violations of the principles conducting auction.
(2.) The facts which are essential to be stated for adjudication of this appeal are that the Deputy Labour Commissioner passed an award for a sum of Rs.2,08,565.67 against the respondent for non-payment of dues to the Employees State Insurance Corporation (ESI). In pursuance of the aforesaid award and keeping in view Section 45C of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948, the Regional Director of ESI issued a recovery certificate to the Collector concerned for realization of the said amount as land revenue. After receipt of the said requisition, the competent authority commenced the proceedings. On 24.11.1980, auction notice was issued in respect of the property situated on plot No.123/256 (47A), Factory Area, Fazalganj, Kanpur admesauring an area about 667 sq. yards. The auction sale was conducted on 25.11.1980 and the appellant was the sole bidder in the auction and his offer of Rs.50,000/- was accepted by the concerned Tehsildar.
(3.) As per the conditions set out in the auction, the successful bidder was required to deposit 1/4th of the amount in cash and the balance 3/4th amount within 15 days. There was a postulate that no cheque would be accepted. Despite the aforesaid stipulation in the auction notice, the appellant deposited a cheque for 1/4th amount in favour of the Tehsildar and a cheque for the balance 3/4th amount was deposited on 4.12.1980. Both the cheques were returned by the Tehsildar on 13.1.1981 indicating that the Manager of the State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur had refused to give the certificate of "good for payment" to the cheques. The said intimation was furnished to the appellant requiring him to submit a bank draft for the amount immediately so that further action could be taken at his end. As is evident, a sum of Rs.50,000/- was deposited by way of bank draft drawn on the State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur but the said bank draft was also returned by order dated 2.12.1981 stating that there was no account in the name of Tehsildar, Kanpur. Thereafter, the appellant deposited the amount in cash some time in December 1981, after expiry of almost one year.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.