MST. NADIA MALIK versus MAKKI CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.
Article 19 Civil Code of Conduct (v. 1908), O XXI, RR 54 (2), 67, 84, and 85 Implementation of a mortgaged property sale order, affirming the objection by the defendant to the decision There was no auction and the entire auction proceedings were fake and fake; the announcement did not mention the auction, nor was it pasted on the notice board of court. And a few minutes after the auction proceedings and attendance sheet records of the parties and participants involved in the auction were not kept on the buyer's request that the debtor did not deposit 20 amount with such request, the auction of accuracy The process cannot be transparent in the absence of fixing. Not to mention the location of the auction in the declaration of notice on the Board of Notices was a violation of the provisions of OA XXI, RR 54 (2) and 67, according to the CPC court auction report, the auction proceeding was 5 pm. The ringing ended at 10 minutes when a buyer's pay order submitted 1/4 of the purchase amount, which by the time the banks were closed, records show that the auction process did not proceed transparently. Had gone and they were forfeited in violation of the terms of the sale, O XXI, R 85, CPC in favor of the auction buyer. And may be challenged by an interested person even though it has been certified by the court of law, except for a deposit of 20% by the objectioner, except that the auction can be heard when OXI, Rr 54 (2), 67, 85 and 86, CPC were violated, and the implementing court erroneously affirmed that such sale was set aside in the rules.
