K.L.PRAKASH Vs. SOUTH INDIAN BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The judgment debtor in E.P.No.337/2001 in O.S.No.841/1998 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Alappuzha, is the revision petitioner, who is aggrieved by the order of the Munsiff in E.A.No. 193/2008, confirmed in C.M.A.No.27/2009 by the Additional District Court, Alappuzha.

(2.) The impugned order was on an application that was filed by the judgment debtor for setting aside the sale of the decree scheduled property, having an extent of 1.39 acres of garden land on 13.02.2006, worth Rs.45 lakhs for a meager amount of Rs.65,162/-. It is contended that even three cents of land from out of that property would have been sufficient to satisfy the entire decree debt and that the price fetched in the auction is too low and the courts below failed to consider the vital facts rendering the same void. It is pointed out that though the proclamation was settled on 25.07.2005 the sale was conducted only on 13.02.2006. Without a fresh proclamation and unmindful of the facts that the judgment debtor never consented waiver of fresh proclamation under Order XXI Rule 69 CPC. Therefore, for that reason alone, the sale ought to have been set aside. E.A.No.193/2006 filed by the revision petitioner under Order XXI, Rule 90 of the CPC. for setting aside should have been allowed, but the same was dismissed by the concurrent finding of the Execution Court, as well as the appellate court and hence, this revision.

(3.) I heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and the respondents. Documents perused.