Bar Council of India Removes 107 Fake Advocates from Delhi Roll to Uphold Legal Integrity

Image
Bar Council of India Removes 107 Fake Advocates from  Delhi Roll to Uphold Legal Integrity The Bar Council of India (BCI) has taken decisive action in a sweeping initiative aimed at maintaining the integrity of the legal profession by removing 107 fake advocates  from the Roll of Advocates in Delhi  between 2019 and October 2024. This step comes as part of the BCI's rigorous verification process to ensure that only qualified, genuinely practising advocates remain in the profession, ultimately upholding public trust in the legal system. Strengthened Verification Framework Under Rule 32 This effort falls under Rule 32 of the Bar Council of India Certificate and Place of Practice (Verification) Rules, 2015 . The BCI  amended Rule 32 on June 23, 2023 , which empowered the BCI to verify, identify, and systematically remove unqualified and fake advocates from the Roll. The rule amendment has made the process of weeding out non-compliant individuals significantly more efficient. Accordi
Post a Comment

Supreme Court Judgment on the Auction Sale of Mula Sahakari Soot Girni Ltd. Property: A Detailed Analysis

Supreme Court Judgment on the Auction Sale of Mula Sahakari Soot Girni Ltd. Property: A Detailed Analysis



Introduction

In Civil Appeal No. 8343 of 2024 (arising from SLP(C) No. 16901 of 2024), the Ahmednagar District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. (Appellant) challenged the High Court of Judicature at Bombay’s dismissal of its writ petition regarding the auction sale of property belonging to Mula Sahakari Soot Girni Ltd. (under liquidation). The appellant contested the auction sale based on two major issues: undervaluation of the property and the participation of fewer than three bidders, claiming these issues led to an unjust outcome. 



Background and Facts of the Case


Loan Sanctioning and Default

The appellant had sanctioned a cash credit loan of ₹95 lakh to the Mula Sahakari Soot Girni Ltd. (referred to as "the society"). When the society defaulted on loan repayment, the appellant lodged a dispute with the Registrar of Cooperative Societies in 2001 for recovery of ₹1.05 crore. The dispute resulted in an award in favor of the appellant in 2011, granting recovery of the amount with an annual interest of 17.5%.


Liquidation of the Society  

In 2005, the society was ordered to be liquidated, and the District Collector of Ahmednagar was appointed as the Liquidator. The liquidation process included the sale of the society’s immovable property. 



Valuation and Auction Sale


Initial Valuation

The property was first valued at ₹4.10 crore in 2012 by a government-approved valuer. Subsequently, the auction sale notice issued in August 2013 set the upset price at ₹4.10 crore. The Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Rahuri (Respondent No. 6) expressed interest and submitted a bid but withdrew due to a lack of competing bids.


Subsequent Valuation and Auction

A fresh valuation in 2015 reduced the property’s value to ₹87.33 lakh, while an open market valuation set it at ₹2.47 crore. The auction, held in May 2016, concluded with Respondent No. 6 being the highest bidder at ₹2.51 crore.



Appellant’s Arguments


The appellant contested the sale on the following grounds:


1. Undervaluation of the Property: The appellant claimed that the property was undervalued in the auction, as its earlier valuation in 2013 was ₹4.10 crore, and properties in the area had appreciated significantly in the following years.

   

2. Lack of Proper Auction Procedure: The appellant argued that only two bidders participated in the auction, violating the requirement for three bidders under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960.


3. Delay in Filing the Writ Petition: The appellant delayed its challenge of the auction process, claiming that it was collecting information after learning that the property had been sold.


Respondents' Defense


The respondents, represented by the State of Maharashtra and Respondent No. 6, presented their counterarguments:


- No Procedural Lapse: The State contended that the auction process followed the High Court’s directives, and three bidders had expressed interest, even though only two participated in the final auction.

  

- Fair Auction: Respondent No. 6, being a statutory body, argued that it participated fairly in an open bidding process and won the auction without any undue influence. The property was subsequently developed after the sale.


Supreme Court’s Analysis and Ruling


Delay in Action by the Appellant

The court noted that the appellant had ample time to challenge the auction process but failed to act promptly. Despite knowing the property’s valuation and upset price from the 2016 auction notice, the appellant did not raise objections until after the auction was completed. This delay weakened the appellant’s case.


Valuation Concerns  

While the court acknowledged the appellant’s concerns about undervaluation, it emphasized that the appellant had been aware of the auction price well before the sale but chose not to act. Moreover, properties seldom depreciate over time, which should have prompted the appellant to intervene earlier if it had legitimate concerns.


No Malafide Conduct  

The court rejected the appellant’s claims of malafide intent in the auction process, affirming that Respondent No. 6 acted within the law. The failure of a third bidder to appear at the auction did not constitute a legal violation, and the auction was conducted fairly.


Conclusion and Outcome


Appeal Dismissed

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s judgment, allowing the sale to Respondent No. 6 to stand. However, the court invoked Article 142 of the Constitution of India to do complete justice, directing Respondent No. 6 to pay the appellant a sum of ₹1.05 crore (without interest) towards full and final settlement within three months. Failure to do so would result in an interest charge of 6% per annum on the unpaid amount.


Compensation to Other Creditors  

The remaining sum of ₹29.78 lakh, after paying the society's creditors, was to be distributed among other creditors, excluding the appellant. If all creditors had been paid, any surplus would be given to the appellant.

Location: Pune, Maharashtra, India

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Evolution of Constitution under Article 14 to 18

Image
 Evolution of Constitution under Article 14 to 18 INTRODUCTION The idea of equality referenced under Article 14 to Article 18 upgrades a more extensive idea and a more extensive part of the examination as the subject of equity itself shapes a vital and powerful idea in itself. The idea of fairness overwhelms the exceptionally two significant ideas of equivalent security of law and equity under the steady gaze of the law. Likewise, the idea of uniformity wins in a wide range of establishments and accommodates equivalent freedoms for people with the abrogation of unapproachable and nullification of titles. The idea is a more extensive methodology as it is significant for society to look to each individual with a similar methodology regardless of his sexual orientation, rank, and religion. The law is visually impaired and is equivalent for each individual as it says that balance wins for each individual and each individual has the option to be secured by the law. Evolution  The fundamenta
Read more

Legal Proceedings Initiated Against Former Jharkhand CM Hemant Soren

Image
Legal Proceedings Initiated Against Former Jharkhand CM Hemant Soren Cognizance Taken by PMLA Court A Special Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) court in Ranchi has taken cognizance of a prosecution complaint filed by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) against Hemant Soren, the former Chief Minister of Jharkhand and leader of the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM). The complaint, comprising 5,500 pages, pertains to a money laundering case related to a land 'scam'. The central probe agency has also attached 8.5 acres of land in connection with the case. Detention and Extended Custody Hemant Soren, who was arrested on January 31, is currently detained at the Birsa Munda Central Jail in Hotwar, Ranchi. His judicial custody was extended till April 4 by the PMLA court on March 21. Additionally, on February 29, the Jharkhand High Court dismissed a petition filed by Soren seeking permission to attend the budget session of the state assembly. Allegations by the Enforcement Directorat
Read more

Equality Before Law

Image
                            Equality Before Law                                                   Introduction The rule of law was firstly introduced by A.V. Dicey in  his book "The Constitution Of England" in which there is rule which only prevails is law in which all are equal. In simple word if any wrong is being done which is not justifiable  by law committed by anyone that may be president, prime minister, or any individual are punishable because there is supremacy of law. Supremacy of law means the government which is power or the people who elected the government all will be treated equally before law.  Article 14 The Indian Constitution 1949, Article 14 guarantees "Equality before law The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth." In article 14 there two  approaches which include negative
Read more