High Court lacks writ jurisdiction in factual disputes on auction validity preferring civil court adjudication.

ORDER

The present Writ Petition has been filed challenging the sale certificate dated 14.01.2026 issued in favour of the 6th respondent with respect to the property comprised in Survey No.3122/1 & 2 (as perG.O.Ms.637), Survey No.3122/23 (as per Onlince Patta) at No.12, Barnaby Road, Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010 pursuant to the Public Auction conducted by the 4^th respondent despite the fact that the 5^th respondent was declared as the highest bidder with the bid amount of Rs.9,30,04,722/- and the petitioner as the second highest bidder with the bid amount of Rs.9,25,00,000/-.

2. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner, being the second highest bidder, was assured by the 4^th respondent that he would be called upon to remit 25% of the bid amount, if the 5^th respondent had failed to do so. However, without giving any opportunity to the petitioner, the sale certificate has been issued in favour of the 6^th respondent who had not even participated in the auction and therefore, the said act of the 4^th respondent is wholly arbitrary and illegal the same warrants interference.

Accordingly, he prayed for allowing the Writ Petition.

3. The issue involved in the present Writ Petition pertains to the conduct of the auction and the issuance of sale certificate which being a disputed question of fact, this Court, sitting under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution, cannot decide the same. Hence, the prayer sought for in this petition cannot be granted. The proper course open for the petitioner would be to approach the competent Civil Court. Hence, this Court, without interfering with the impugned sale certificate, is inclined to grant liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent Civil Court.