J. B. PARDIWALA, MANOJ MISRA
AL-CAN Export Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Prestige H. M. Polycontainers Ltd. – Respondent
What is... How to determine whether the Additional Commissioner had jurisdiction under Section 247 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code to hear appeals challenging a revenue sale? What is... What are the standards for fairness and compliance with mandatory notice provisions in public auctions conducted by revenue authorities under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code? What is... How to reconcile the applicability of Order XXI Rule 90 CPC to writ proceedings under Article 226 in the context of revenue auctions and the controls needed to ensure legality and non-arbitrariness?
Key Points: - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!)
JUDGMENT :
J.B. Pardiwala, J.
For the convenience of exposition, this judgment is divided into the following parts:
| INDEX |
| A. FACTUAL MATRIX |
| B. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT |
| C. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT NO. 6/Asset Reconstruction Co. (India) Ltd. (ARCIL) |
| D. ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION |
| E. RELEVANT STATUTORY PROVISIONS OF THE REVENUE CODE |
| F. ANALYSIS |
| i. Whether the provisions of Order XXI Rule 90 of the Code of Civil Procedure would apply to the writ proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution? |
| a. Difference between the auction sale conducted by the court in the execution proceedings initiated by the decree holder and the auction proceedings conducted by the State through its revenue authorities like Tahsildar, etc. |
| ii. Whether the Additional Commissioner, Konkan Division, Maharashtra had the jurisdiction to decide the two appeals filed by the respondent nos. 1 and 6 respectively under Section 247 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966? |
| G. CONCLUSION |
i. Whether the provisions of Order XXI Rule 90 of the Code of Civil Procedure would apply to the writ proceedings under Article 226
Babubhai Muljibhai Patel v. Nandlal Khodidas Barot reported in (1974) 2 SCC 706 [Para 65]
Chandra Singh v. State of Rajasthan
Dhirendra Nath Gorai v. Sudhir Chandra Ghosh
Gadde Venkateswara Rao v. Government of Andhra Pradesh
Jagdish Mandal v. State of Orissa and Others reported in (2007) 14 SCC 517 [Para 53]
Jaswantlal Natvarlal Thakkar v. Sushilaben Manilal Dangarwala
Kadiyala Rama Rao v. Gutala Kahna Rao
Maharaja Chintamani Saran Nath Shahdeo v. State of Bihar
Mahesh Chandra v. Regional Manager, U.P. Financial Corporation & Ors.
Mallikarjuna Mudhagal Nagappa v. State of Karnataka
Mathew Varghese v. M. Amritha Kumar reported in 2014 (5) SCC 610 [Para 23]
Puran Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors. reported in (1996) 2 SCC 205 [Para 47]
Raj Kumar Soni v. State of U.P.
Ram Kala v. Asstt. Director, Consolidation of Holdings
Saheb Khan v. Mohd. Yousufuddin reported in (2006) 4 SCC 476 [Para 31]
State of Punjab & Others v. Mehar Din reported in (2022) 5 SCC 648 [Para 54]
State of U.P. v. Vijay Anand reported in AIR 1963 SC 946 [Para 42]
Tata Cellular v. Union of India reported in (1994) 6 SCC 651 [Para 52]
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.