HIRABAI Vs. HANUMATH KRISHNAJI BHIDE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is against the order dated 6-11-1995 passed on LA. I in Execution Petition No. 395 of 1994, by the Principal Civil Judge, Bijapur.

(2.) This appeal is by judgment-debtor No. 14. The facts of this case are: Respondents ' 1 to 4 are the decree-holders. They have obtained the decree as against the appellant and other 13 judgment-debtors. After obtaining the decree, the decree-holders instituted execution proceedings for recovery of the amount due under the decree. In that process they brought the properties belonging to the judgement-debtors for sale. Three items of properties were brought to sale i.e., land measuring 8 acres in Survey No. 4/1, 13 acres 4 guntas in Survey No. 24/2 and 6 acres 1 gunta in Survey No. 23/2 of Hanchinal Village, Bijapur District, which belong to the judgment-debtors. Out of the above said three items only land measuring 8 acres in Survey No. 4/1 was sold in public auction held on 26-8-1995. After the sale the appellant, judgment-debtor No. 14 filed an application under Order 21, Rule 90, Civil Procedure Code and prayed for setting aside the sale. The auction purchaser who is respondent 5 in this appeal filed his objections to the application filed by the judgment-debtor No. 14. The Executing Court by its order dated 6-11-1995 rejected the application filed by the appellant under Order 21, Rule 90, Civil Procedure Code. The said order is called in question by the appellant.

(3.) In the execution proceedings there are about 14 judgment-debtors. Appellant 1 is one of the judgment-debtors who challenged the impugned order passed by the Executing Court. Sri Jaykumar S.Patil, appearing for the appellant contended that the Trial Court rejected his application holding that the application filed by the appellant is not maintainable as he had not taken the said objections before the sale.