ASHOK GUPTA Vs. GREWAL RICE MILLS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the order dated 25th July, 1990, passed by the Additional District Judge, Sangrur, by which the application of the petitioner, who is a Court Auctioneer, for payment of commission fee was declined.

(2.) PUNJAB Financial Corporation (Respondent No. 5) filed an application under Section 31 of the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951, in the Court of Additional District/judge, Sangrur, against respondents No. 1 to 4. In that case, immovable property owned by respondents No. 1 to 4 was ordered to be sold by the then Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur, vide order dated 23rd July, 1988, and the sale was to be conducted on the spot on 30th August, 1988. The petitioner was directed to conduct the sale proceedings. The auction conducted by the petitioner on 30th August, 1988 was set aside by the Court vide its order dated 26th February, 1990 an account of the fact that the auction proceedings suffered from material irregularity because the proclamation was made on l6th August, 1988 and the sale was to be conducted after fifteen days of the proclamation, where as the sale was conducted on 30th August 1988 i. e, one clay/before the due date. This resulted in substantial loss to the judgment- debtor.

(3.) RELEVANT rule, i. e. Rule 23 contained in, Punjab and Haryana High Court Rules and Orders Volume I, Chapter 12-L, which is applicable to the facts of the present case, reads as under: