MANJAMMA Vs. S N SURYANARAYANA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the judgment-Debtor No. 2 against the order dated 25-10-78 passed by III Addl. Civil Judge, Mysore in Ex. case No. 88/77 rejecting I. A. 12 filed by Judgment-Debtor ('JDr' for short) No. 2, under Or. 21, Rule 90, C.P.C.

(2.) The sale was held on 30-6-78. One Shikshadevi, respondent No. 2 herein, bid the property for Rs.50,000/- in the sale held in the Court and as she was the highest bidder, the bid was accepted.

(3.) JDr No. 2 filed the application under Or. 21, Rule 90 C.P.C. challenging the said sale alleging that the sale proclamation was bad in law as it was not published in Kannada. According to her, as the sale proclamation was issued in English, nobody came to know about the contents of the sale proclamation or about the publication of the sale proclamation. She has then urged that she was the owner of the property and her name had not been shown as owner in the sale proclamation. On the other hand, the sale proclamation showed the name of JDr No. 1 as owner. According to her, this dissuaded the people from coming to the Court to bid for the property. She then urged that the sale proclamation was not published with notice to the Corporation as required by Or. 21, Rule 54(2). She then urged that the sale was not held on the spot as required under Rule 138 of the Civil Rules of Practice. The sale was held only in Court and, therefore, this also rendered the sale bad at law. She, further, contended that on account of this irregularity almost bordering on illegality, substantial injury was caused and hence she prayed for setting aside the sale.