On October 23,1981 the sale was companyfirmed and the balance amount was deposited on November 4, 1981.
The learned Single Judge by judgment dated August 21, 1990 quashed the order of the Addl.
The first respondent filed writ petition No.
Distt.
From the Judgment and Order dated 10.4.1991 of the Madras High Court in Writ Appeal No.
On March 30, 1979 the sale by auction was held by the Tahsildar.
246 of 1984 in the High Court.
Thus this appeal.
The formidable objection raised by the appellant is that it is mandatory under Sec.36 that the date and place of sale shall be published in the Gazette and that the publica tion did number mention the place of sale.
12,225 and deposited a sum of Rs.2,000 being 15 per cent of the sale price.
The appellant filed an application but by proceed ing dated October 23, 1981, the Revenue Divi sional Officer overruled the objections and dismissed the application.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
On appeal the Addl.
38 of 1991.
Under Sec.
Collector, Salem set aside the sale on October 13,1982.
On writ appeal, the Division Bench dis missed it.
Parasaran, K.V. Vijaya Kumar and V. Bala Chandran for the Appellants.
4380 of 1991.
Collec tor.
T. Selvamani and P.P. Tripathi for the Respondents.
36 of the Act, the first respondent should have deposit ed the balance companysideration within 30 days from the date of the auction.
A sum of Rs.
This appeal is against the judgment dated April 4, 1991 of the Madras High Court.
The first respondent purchased for a sum of Rs.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RAMASWAMY, J. Special Leave is granted.
12,163.50 p. was alleged to have been misappropriated by the appellant number he was acquitted of the charge of misappropriation and for the recovery thereof his 13.07 acres of companyfee estate situated in Semmanthaputhur village was brought to sale under the Tamil Nadu Revenue Recovery Act, 1894 for short The Act .
