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

1988 Supreme(All) 605

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
N. N. MITHAL, RAVI S. DHAVAN
ZILA PARISHAD, MUZAFFARNAGAR - Appellant
Versus
UDAI VEER SINGH - Respondents
F. A. F. O. 438 Of 1988
Decided On : 12/08/1988

Advocates Appeared:
MURLIDHAR, R.C.SRIVASTAV, R.K.JAIN, R.N.SINGHA

An auction is complete and binding on the parties when the auctioneer announces its completion by the fall of the hammer or in other customary manner, and until such announcement is made, any bidder may retract his bid.

Headnote:

AUCTION - PUBLIC - Zila Parishad conducting auction for right to collect fee for loading and unloading animals at cattle fair - Highest bidder depositing entire amount as per conditions of auction - Zila Parishad attempting to re-auction subject-matter of auction to another candidate - Highest bidder seeking injunction to protect right to carry on trade - Zila Parishad filing appeal from order granting injunction - Court holding that auction was complete and binding on Zila Parishad - Appeal dismissed.

Fact of the Case:

Zila Parishad, Muzaffarnagar, conducted a public auction for the right to collect fee for loading and unloading animals at a cattle fair. The highest bidder, Udai Vir Singh, deposited the entire amount as per the conditions of the auction. However, the Zila Parishad attempted to re-auction the subject-matter of the auction to another candidate. Udai Vir Singh filed a suit seeking an injunction to protect his right to carry on trade. The trial court granted the injunction, and the Zila Parishad filed an appeal.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the auction was complete and binding on the Zila Parishad. The court found that the auction was conducted regularly, with no irregularities pointed out by any party. The court also found that the highest bid substantially exceeded the contract price of the previous year, and that the highest bidder had complied with all the conditions of the auction. The court held that the Zila Parishad's attempt to re-auction the subject-matter of the auction was arbitrary and illegal, and that the highest bidder was entitled to carry out the contract.

Issues: 1. Whether the auction was complete and binding on the Zila Parishad. 2. Whether the Zila Parishad's attempt to re-auction the subject-matter of the auction was arbitrary and illegal.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. An auction is complete when the auctioneer announces its completion by the fall of the hammer or in other customary manner, and until such announcement is made, any bidder may retract his bid. 2. The Zila Parishad's attempt to re-auction the subject-matter of the auction was arbitrary and illegal because: a. The auction was conducted regularly, with no irregularities pointed out by any party. b. The highest bid substantially exceeded the contract price of the previous year. c. The highest bidder had complied with all the conditions of the auction. d. The Zila Parishad did not give the highest bidder an opportunity to be heard before deciding to re-auction the subject-matter of the auction.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the Zila Parishad's appeal and upheld the trial court's order granting the injunction.

RAVI S. DHAVAN, J.

( 1 ) PUBLIC auction is the issue in the present appeal. The duration of the contract as a consequence of the auction is one year i. e. April 1, 1988 to March 31, 1989. The subject-matter of the auction is the right to ferry or load or unload animals at the cattle fair for a monetary consideration. The auction was conducted by a corporate body the Zila Parishad, district Muzaffarnagar, constituted under the Uttar Pradesh Zila Parishad and Kshetra Samiti Adhiniyam, 1959. The auction was closed upon the highest bid having. been received. The Zila Parishad attempted to auction the subject-matter of the auction to yet another candidate outside the auction, subsequently. This led to the person who had offered the highest bid upon which auction was closed to seek in injunction to protect the right to carry on his trade by the trial Court. The Zila Parishad chose to file tie present first appeal from order questioning its own auction. The consideration whether injunction has been granted appropriately or inappropriately will inevitably affect the first appeal from order and the suit itself in which the injunction has been sought. The nature of the rights and obligations of the parties are in reference to the current financial year. Thus, this Court heard the matter to decide the appeal itself instead of the question of an interim order.


( 2 ) NOW the facts : A cattle fair is held at Banat district Muzaffarnagar. The fair is known as Pashu Panth Banat. It is held every Thursday of the week within the limits of the Zila Parishad, Muzaffarnagar. There is a flourishing trade at the cattle fair and the cattle sold and purchased is visited with a fee to be paid to the Zila Parishad for loading and unloading animals at the cattle fair. The right to collect fee is given to the highest bidder at a public auction held by the Zila Parishad, Muzaffarnagar. For the period of April 1, 1988 to March 31, 1989 the Zila Parishad, Muzaffarnagar announced by advertisement in the newspapers a public auction scheduled for March 17, 1988 to confer the right to collect a fee for loading and unloading animals at the cattle fair to the highest bidder. The advertisement in the newspapers is Annexure-11-D to the affidavit supporting the stay application referred to hereinafter as the affidavit. This advertisement carrying an invitation to make a bid also set conditions should the invitation be acted upon by prospective bidders. The first condition was that bidding would be permitted only if a sum of Rs. 50,000/- has been deposited with the Zila Parishad. The second condition laid down was that the highest bidder would have to deposit Rs. 2,00,000/- or 25% of the bid whichever is the highest immediately after the auction. The third condition was that should the second condition not be complied with then the security of Rs. 50,000/- would be forfeited and the next highest bid can be acted upon. The last condition was that the balance amount of the bid is to be deposited within three days of its acceptance. The auction as scheduled was carried out. The highest bid was of the plaintiff-respondent Udai Vir Singh at Rs. 4,75,000/-, implying that the auction closed at this highest bid. It may be mentioned here that it is a matter of record that the bid in the previous year in reference to the same cattle fair was Rs. 4,31,000/ -. The bid at the auction for the period 1988 to 1989 thus exceeded by Rs. 44,000/ -.

( 3 ) BEFORE the Court examines other matters the mechanics of the auction thus far for the plaintiff-respondent were : (a) Prior to making a bid he deposited Rs. 50,000/- with the Zila Parishad, (b) upon his highest bid closing the auction, he was required to deposit a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- after the auction i. e. on March 17, 1988. This is evidenced by a receipt of the same day bearing No. 65/03363 for Rs. 2,00,000/ -. The balance amount of Rs. 2,75,000/- was deposited at the District Co-operative Bank, Muzaffarnagar main branch on March 23








































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 Back to top