Pakistan Case Law
2013 CLD 1430

QAISER ABBAS vs MUSLIM COMMERCIAL BANK LTD. and others

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2013 CLD 1430
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition No,275-L of 2013
Date2013-04-30
Judge(s)Mian Saqib Nisar and Iqbal Hameedur Rahman
Authored byMian Saqib Nisar
ResultLeave granted
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against the concurrent findings of lower courts regarding the validity of a court-ordered auction. The petitioner contends that the auction process was fundamentally flawed and illegal, citing several irregularities: the court auctioneer unilaterally changed the auction date from the court-ordered 20-4-2010 to 29-4-2010 without authority; the property description in the advertisement was incorrect; and the mandatory legal requirements for advertisement were not met, specifically noting that the notice was published in an inconspicuous newspaper, 'Karnama', which lacked circulation in the relevant area of Multan city. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to consider whether these procedural irregularities and the unauthorized actions of the court auctioneer vitiated the auction proceedings. Pending the final adjudication of the appeal, the Court issued an interim order restraining the transfer of possession of the property from the petitioner to the auction purchaser, thereby preserving the status quo.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Does the unauthorized change of an auction date by a court auctioneer vitiate the auction proceedings?
  • Can an auction be set aside if the property description in the advertisement is incorrect?
  • Does the publication of an auction notice in an inconspicuous newspaper, failing to meet legal requirements, invalidate the auction?
court auctionauctioneer authorityprocedural irregularityexecution proceedingsleave to appealproperty auction

ORDER

1. 'MIAN SAQIB NISAR, J.---Learned counsel for the petitioner states, that the learned executing court vide order dated 17-2-2010 had specifically directed that the auction of the property in question shall take place on 20-4-2010, but the court auctioneer without any authority, in the advertisement of auction had fixed the date as 29-4-2010 and illegally auctioned the property on such date; that the description of the property has been Wrongly and incorrectly mentioned in the advertisement; that the proper advertisement required under the law had not been made; the property was situated in Multan city, whereas advertisement/publication of the notice has been made in inconspicuous newspaper, titled Karnama, which is published from Lodhran and Vehari inter alia, all these factors are vital, which vitiate the auction, but these aspects have not been taken into account by the courts below. Leave is granted to consider the above. In the meantime, pursuant to the auction, the possession shall not be taken from the petitioner and given to the auction purchaser.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.