M PANCHAKSHARAPPA Vs. SHIVAYOGESHWARA COTTON PRESS CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On a reference made by Jagannatha Shetty, J. the above revision petition has come up for hearing before this Division Bench. It arises out of an application (I.A.3) filed by the petitioner under Order XXI, Rule 90, CPC for setting asi,de a sale of immovable property belonging to him held on 11-4-1963 in Ex.C.No.476/62 on the file of the Munsiff, pavanagere. The respondent had filed the above execution petition against the petitioner for the recovery of a sum of Rs.3,846-86. The sale notice in the above case was issued to the petitioner on 30-11-1962 and on his refusal to receive the same, service on the petitioner was held sufficient by the Munsiff. Thereafter, an application (I.A.1) was filed by the petitioner requesting the Court to hear him on the objections that he had filed to the execution proceedings. After several adjournments, the case was set down for hearing of I.A.1 on 1-3-1963. When the case was called on 1-3-1963, the judgment- debtor was absent and hence I.A.1 filed by him was dismissed. The Court directed that the property be sold on 11-4-1963.

(2.) On 9-4-1963, the decree-holder filed an application (I.A.2) under Or.XXI, R.72 CPC praying that he might be permitted to offer bid at the sale and to set off the decretal amount against the price payable at the sale. The executing Court passed an order which reads as follows : " Permitted to bid for the estimated value and set off allowed." The property was accordingly sold on 11-4-1963 and the highest bid of Rs.8,000 offered by the respondent was accepted by the Court. The respondent did not deposit twenty-five per cent of the purchase money as required by Or.XXI, R.84(1) CPC as the decretal amount was more than Rs.2,000. He however deposited in time the balance of purchase money after setting off the decretal amount in accordance with R.85 of Or.XXI. Thereafter, the case was adjourned to 14-6-1963 to pass orders regarding the confirmation of sale. On 13-6-1963, the petitioner filed the above application under Or.XXI, R.90 CPC for setting aside the sale held on 11-4-63

(3.) The following allegations were made in the said application :