Karnataka HC Notices Sri Lankan Judge's Rights Plea
07 Mar 2026
Karnataka Proposes Social Media Ban for Under-16s
07 Mar 2026
Justice Dharmadhikari Sworn In as 55th Madras HC Chief Justice
07 Mar 2026
Punjab HC Acquits Ram Rahim in Journalist Murder
07 Mar 2026
Appellate Courts Can Rely on Unexhibited Public Documents Produced by Plaintiff: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC
07 Mar 2026
Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, SYED QAMAR HASAN RIZVI
Flavuro Foods Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Official Liquidator – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
JUDGMENT :
1. This intra court appeal is directed against an order passed by the Company Judge, dated 7.11.2023 in Company Petition No. 27 of 2007. The learned Company Judge has noticed that pursuant to auction proceedings initiated by the official liquidator the proposed sale was widely published in Amar Ujala (Hindi) (All UP Edition) and Hindustan Times (All India Edition) (English). Three bids have been submitted before the official liquidator all of which were above the reserve price fixed by the Company Judge. Learned Company Judge by the order under challenge has directed the official liquidator to re-advertise the auction by enhancing the reserve price to the amount quoted by the highest bidder i.e. the appellant. Aggrieved by the decision of Company Judge the highest bidder has filed the present appeal.
2. It transpires that in the liquidation proceedings an order came to be passed by the Company Judge on 24.5.2023 directing the official liquidator to publish e-auction notice for sale of the property in question. Auction notices
The highest offer received in the public auction should be accepted as a fair value unless there are allegations of fraud, collusion, etc.
The Court has discretion under Section 457(1)(c) of the Companies Act to accept higher bids from non-participants in an auction, prioritizing the interests of creditors.
The finality of auction proceedings and the principle that receiving higher bids post the conclusion of the auction does not justify reopening of concluded proceedings.
An auction conducted by a liquidator is valid unless substantive financial prejudice is demonstrated; post-auction higher bids do not justify reopening concluded proceedings.
Purpose of auction (open or close format) is to get the most remunerative price and giving opportunity to intending bidders to participate and fetch higher realizable value of property – If that path....
The BDA has the authority to reject bids in e-Auctions without justification, as per its Rules, and such discretion is not subject to judicial review unless proven arbitrary.
(1) Allotment of Industrial Plot – Ordinarily, when large areas of industrial land are auctioned, overall price would be separately assessed as compared to smaller plots – Merely because selling pric....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article