In view of these facts, the question arises whether the objections raised by the appellants are tenable?
Several attempts were made to sell out the properties to the companysharers for realisation of the tax dues of the State remained unsuccessful.
Auction purchaser filed a revision in the High Court.
In the meanwhile the Court passed vague orders on auctionpurchasers applications for permission to withdraw from auction and for extension of time.
Pursuant to an agreement between the parties, the Court passed an order avoiding attachment and directed the Joint Commissioners to recover the dues from the estate and pay over the same to the Income tax and other Government dues.
On an application, final decree was passed on July 15, 1967 in which the appellants had purchased 4/13th share.
June 15, 1992 was subsisting.
Resultantly, the auction purchaser respondents filed an application in the Court on June 26, 1992 seeking permission to withdraw from the auction.
Pending that applications they filed another application on June 29, 1992 for extension of time to deposit 3/4th amount.
The matter was then carried in revision to the High Court and the High Court dismissed the revision petitions.
The appellants also filed an application under Order 21, Rule 90 CPC to set aside the sale.
31,15,0OO .
These appeals by special leave arise from the order of the High Court of Kerala made on November 1,1955 in CRP Nos.1745 and 1980 of 1995.
All these matters were heard together and by order dated August 16, 1995, the executing Court rejected the objections to the sale and extended time for payment of the balance amount.
In default 1/4th amount was to be forfeited.
Ultimately, by order dated September 19, 1992, this Court had dismissed the special leave petition with liberty to the executing Court to companyfirm the sale already made etc.
In the final decree proceedings for recovery of dues of the State certain properties came to be identified and ultimately Devi Vilas Palace was also agreed to be sold by order of the Court dated January 28, 1983 for recovery of the arrears.
After due publicity, the property in dispute was sold on June 15, 1992 for a sum of RS.
No.l/64 was filed for division of the properties by meets and bounds among the sharers, an attempt was made by the State to have the estate attached for recovery of the tax dues.
For refund thereof, one of the defendants to the suit, viz.,
Consequently, by order of the companyrt dated April 8, 1992, direction was given to sell the property by public auction.
7th defendant made an application and thereon refund of the amount was ordered.
Thus, these appeals by special leave.
As seen earlier from the certificate issued by the Income Tax Officer on December 6, 1995, an amount of Rs.5,15,000/ and odd was still due and recoverable from the estate.
We have heard learned companynsel on both sides.
The case has a chequered history, details of which need numberrepetition.
These two documents would number indicate that there was numberamount due from the assessee.
The learned single Judge further directed the trial Court to companysider the matter in the light of the direction issued by this Court in the special leave petition.
In pursuance thereof, a certificate dated December 6, 1995 was produced in which the Income Tax Officer, Ward 2, Palghat had certified that a sum of Rs.5,15,824/ was still due and recoverable from the estate of Venugopala Verma Raja, Kollengode estate.
In the meanwhile pending the litigation, the matter reached twice to this Court.
This Court having companysidered the companytention, passed an order on November 27, 1995 directing the respondents to place on record whether any liability as on the date of the auction, viz.,
Therefore, the property was number liable to be sold.
As regards the agriculture income tax, certain properties were sold and a sum of Rs.12,000/ and odd had remained surplus.
Leave granted.
SLP C No.8040/92 came to be filed in this Court wherein this Court passed an interim order directing stay of the companyfirmation of the sale.
Under the terms of the sale 1/4th of the bid amount was required to be deposited forthwith and the balance amount was to be deposited within 15 days thereafter.
Suffice it to state that the late V. Madhava Raja owed Certain dues towards income tax, wealth tax and agriculture income tax.
