(1.) LEAVE granted.
(2.) IN Suit No. 2 of 1966 filed by United Bank of India against Hanuman Foundries Ltd. for foreclosure and sale of hypothicated property, pursuant to a preliminary decree, the Court receiver sold the hypothica at which the appellant became highest bidder for Rs. 60 lakhs and he paid a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs. The sale was confirmed in his favour on August 29, 1990. Thereafter respondents No. 1 and 2 were sought to be impleaded to the suit but denied by the Single Judge. On appeal, while impleading them, the Division Bench directed the Single Judge to hear the respondents before they are ejected from the property in question by order dated 2.3.92 which is the subject -matter of this appeal. While disposing of the appeal, the Division Bench has pointed out that the sale was vitiated due to the manner in which the Single Judge dealing with Company Law matters, passed the orders in his chamber by observing thus :
(3.) ACCORDINGLY , the sale and confirmation thereof on 29.8.90 are set aside. The appeal is remanded to the High Court and the appropriate single Judge would proceed to conduct the sale in accordance with law by open auction after due publication of the sale so that all the intending bidders would have opportunity to participate in the sale. Thereafter, it would take action according to law. Since it is a suit for foreclosure and the preliminary decree has become final, it is not open to any party to widen the scope of the suit or sale made pursuant to the preliminary decree. If any party has got any other right to remedy, the same has to be worked out elsewhere, according to law and not in this suit. We are not expressing any opinion with regard to the rights, if any, of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in the property. The appeal is allowed with no orders as to costs.