IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL REVIEW No.190 of 2008 RAM BAHADUR THAKUR LTD & ORS Versus MANISH MOHAN SHARMA & ANR WITH CIVIL REVIEW No.191 of 2008 RAM BAHADUR THAKUR LTD & ORS Versus MANISH MOHAN SHARMA & ANR ----------- 05. 11.09.2008. Counsel for the petitioners has filed supplementary affidavit which is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the review petitioners and the counsel for the Opposite Party Nos. 1 and 2. Limitation in filing the review applications is condoned. 3. By filing these two review applications petitioners have sought review of the order dated 15.5.2008 passed by this Court in Company Appeal Nos. 6 and 7 of 2008 whereunder this Court permitted the Local Commissioner Shri Munir Murchant, Advocate, Mumbai High Court to proceed with the auction for the failure of the petitioners to deposit the title documents of the five sale estates as also other assets by 26th of October, 2007 on the ground that having deposited a sum of Rs. 16.21 crores with the Syndicate Bank which is sufficient to liquidate their dues the title documents of the five sale estates as also the other assets are not being returned by the Bank for the reasons that the documents are with the Debt Recovery Tribunal and for the failure of the Tribunal to hold its sittings, the documents are not being returned and the property has been put to auction on - 2 - 6.9.2008 for the failure of the Bank to return the documents. In this background petitioners have filed these review applications and have submitted that they be not dispossessed from the property which was put to auction. Such prayer is vehemently opposed by the counsel for the Opposite Parties on the ground that petitioners having failed to comply with the directions of this Court could not have sought review of the earlier order on a ground which was not available to them on the date of the order as according to Opposite Parties on 15.5.2008, the petitioners had not deposited the sum of Rs. 16.21 crores with the Syndicate Bank. When aforesaid objection was taken, counsel for the petitioners changed the plank of his argument and submitted with reference to the letter dated 6.9.2008 of Shri Manoj Mohan Sharma, Annexure-5 to the supplementary affidavit that the auction proceedings conducted by Shri Munir Merchant, the Local Commissioner on 6.9.2008 was not in accordance with law as various procedural formalities which are required to be carried out before conducting the auction were never carried out even the petitioners were not permitted to enter the auction house and accordingly, they wrote a letter dated 6.9.2008 highlighting such illegalities as also served copy thereof on the Local Commissioner. When aforesaid submission was raised, counsel for the Opposite Parties submitted that as the petitioners failed to carry out the terms and conditions required for participation in the auction proceedings, they were not permitted to participate in the auction proceedings. 4. Having heard counsel for the parties as also having - 3 - appreciated the submissions, I am of the view that legality of the auction has to be challenged before the Company Law Board and until such challenge is made in accordance with law before the Company Law Board, the submission questioning the legality of the auction cannot be appreciated in this Court in review jurisdiction, accordingly, I permit the petitioners to assail the auction proceedings held by the Local Commissioner on 6.9.2008 before the Company Law Board by filing a petition therefor on or before Thursday next i.e. 18.9.2008. Copy of such petition should be served on the Opposite Parties by 17.9.2008 and the Company Law Board is requested to decide the legality of the auction proceeding on merits as early as possible, in any case, within a period of two weeks and thereafter proceed to confirm the sale in accordance with law. 5. Both the review applications are, accordingly disposed of. Rajesh/ (V.N.Sinha, J.)