SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1998 Supreme(Del) 418

ARUN KUMAR, M.S.A.SIDDIQUI
ASHWANI KAPUR – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ARUN JAITLEY, Manish Bhatnagar, Navin Chawla, P.N.MISHRA

Arun Kumar, J.

( 1 ) THE facts leading to the filing of the present writ petition are:the Delhi Development Authority (for short "dda") put up anadvertisement on 7/06/1989 in the newspapers announcing the auctionof a plot for 2/3 star hotel at Pitam Pura, New Delhi. The plot was to be. auctioned as per certain terms and conditions. There is no dispute betweenthe parties about the terms and conditions of the auction including the factthat the auction was on the basis of perpetual leasehold rights and theprovisions of the Delhi Development Authority (Disposal of Developednazul Lands) Rules, 1981 would be applicable. The material terms of auctionfor purposes of the present petition are :

" (IV) The officer conducting the auction shall normally accept thebids subject to confirmation by the Competent Authority. Thei highest bid offered at the fall of hammer at the auction and theperson whose bid has been accepted shall pay earnest money,a sum equivalent to 25% of his bid either in cash or by bank draftin favour of the DDA. The amount of earnest money is to bedeposited in Central Bank of India, Vikas Sadan, INA Colony,new Delhi. If the earnest money is not paid, the auction alreadyheld in







































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top