5.70 lakhs and for machinery to Rs 5.40 lakhs. It must be noted that at this time the Judge, who was then holding the sale, was not the presiding officer but another judge, since the former was on leave. It was felt by the latter that it would be better to have some valuation report to serve as a basis and to guide the Court in concluding whether a grossly unjust offer was being fobbed off on it. The Receiver who was in charge requested both the judgment debtor and the Corporation to get valuation reports from competent valuers and the sale itself stood adjourned. The judgment debtor did not bother to have the properties valued but the Corporation secured the services of a competent valuer, Corona Electricals of Bombay, who estimated the land and buildings to be worth Rs 10,46,096 and the machinery Rs 7,02,000. The total value thus arrived at was Rs 17,48,096. In the light of various facts, including the absence of an alternative evaluation report from the judgment debtor's side, these Corona figures were rightly treated by both Courts as tentatively sound. The auction held on September 3, 1969, however, fetched the highest offer for the two lots of only Rs 5,65,000 and Rs 5,00,000 respectively, in the latter case Rs 40,000 less than on the previous occasion. After considerable persuasion by the Judge, the Appellant agreed to raise the offer for both lots together to a gross sum of Rs 11,50,000, and making an intelligent guess on the given circumstances the Court approved the sale, which is now being challenged in these proceedings as an insensible and injurious sanctioning of the sale, ignoring the hopeful prospects of higher prices had the auction been adjourned and better and fuller publicity given. 7. Certain salient facts may be highlighted in this context. A court sale is a forced sale and, notwithstanding the competitive element of a public auction, the best price is not often forthcoming. The
