Manash Nath Roy, J. - (1.) This appeal, which has been directed against an order dated 3rd October 1988, filed by the Vinay Kumar Vijay Kumar Ganodia, on the basis of the leave as received from this Court, is really one of the rearrest of the rare cases relating a proceedings arising out of an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, from reasons more than one. In fact, by the said order dated 3rd October 1988, a learned single Judge of this Court refused the prayer of the appellant before us in this appeal, to have his representation allowed and to add him in the concerned proceedings. The Respondent Canton Carpentry Works (P) Ltd. thereinafter referred to as the said Company), at all material times-owned and still owns Premises Nos. 12, 14 and 16, Radhanath Chaudhury Road, Calcutta-700 015 and there is no doubt that various certificate proceedings, on different accounts, as initiated by the Certificate officer concerned, under the provisions of Bengal Public Demands Recovery Act, 1913 thereinafter referred to as the said Act), were and are pending.
(2.) It appeared Co us that the proceeding of the concerned certificate cases, which are at least 20 in number, were duly served od the said Company and consequently on Respondent Writ petitioner No. 2 Mr. J. C. Walkin, Managing Director of the said Company, on the basis of the certificate proceedings as initiated. It has been alleged that the Certificate officer concerned had attached the right, title and interest of the said Company in respect of one of the premises mentioned hereinbefore viz. Premises No. 14, Radhanath Chaudhur. Road, Calcutta-700 015 thereinafter referred to as the said premises), including a building standing thereon and the machinery attached thereto. There is also no doubt that diverse proceedings took place against such action of the Certificate officer and ultimately, by an order dated 18th September, 1985, a Division Bench of this Court, presided over by M. M. Dutta, J. (as His Lordship then was), by consent of the parties, was pleased to pass an order directing that the said premises to be sold in auction by the Certificate officer concerned, after complying with the necessary formalities under the said Act.
(3.) The public auction as directed, was admittedly held by the Certificate officer concerned on 18th November, 1985 and it would appear that in the said auction, the appellant in this appeal, was declared and found to be the highest bidder and the bid amount was for Rs. 44 lakh's. Since he was the highest bidder, his bid was accepted by the Certificate officer concerned. The appellant in this appeal has stated that he duly deposited the bid amount, which again was received by the Certificate officer concerned on or about 17th December, 1985, and thereafter, one Nando Kumar Kandoy moved this Court, challenging such certificate sale and ultimately, he agreed to purchase the said premises for 46 lakh's and on the basis thereof, another learned Judge of this Court dealing with the matter, on 20th December, 1985 directed the said Shri Kandoy lo deposit Rs. 12 lakh's by 24th December, 1985 and the balance thereafter and the Certificate officer concerned was also directed Jo confirm the sale and he was further given some directions in the matter, till the disposal of the writ petition, apart from directing that in default of any of such payments as aforesaid, the order as made, would stand vacated.;