SUBRAHMANYA BHAT Vs. SANTHOSH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

(2.) Petitioner is the auction purchaser, who purchased 1/5th right held by the 1st respondent judgment debtor in a property having an extent of 26 cents in Re - survey No. 5/3B and 52 cents comprised in Re - survey No. 7/3 if Kumgbadje Village, which was brought to sale in EP No.137/06 in OS No. 284/05 by the decree holder, the 2nd respondent bank. After depositing the sale price, sale over the property was confirmed and later a sale certificate was issued in favour of the petitioner. To get separate possession of the property petitioner instituted a suit for partition OS No. 344/07 before the Munsiff's Court, Kasargode seeking division of the 1/5th share which belonged to the 1st respondent, obtained by him under the sale certificate. That suit is still pending adjudication. Meanwhile, the 1st respondent / judgment debtor moved an application, EA No. 404/07, before the execution Court under S.47 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short 'the Code') to set aside the sale was impeached on the ground that there was no fresh proclamation after adjournment of the sale fixed beyond a period of 30 days from the date of proclamation, and it violated the mandatory provision under sub-rule (2) of R.69 of O.21 of the Code. Petitioner / auction purchaser resisted that application filing objections. The learned Munsiff, after hearing both sides, found merit in the challenge raised by the 1st respondent / judgment debtor and set aside the sale vide Ext. P9 order. Propriety and correctness of Ext. P9 order is challenged in the writ petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this Court under Art.227 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) I heard the counsel on both sides. The parties are hereinafter referred to as the auction purchaser and the judgment debtor.