PANDURANGAN CHETTIAR Vs. EKAMBARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order of the District Munsif, Kallakurichi, dated 22nd April, 1981, in E.A. No. 855 of 1980 setting aside the execution sale held on 25th February, 1980.

(2.) THE decree-holder filed E. P. No. 444 of 1979 for the sale of the immovable property already attached before judgment on 9th January, 1975, in I. A. No. 58 of 1975 under Order 21, rule 66 of he Code of Civil Procedure. Along with the execution petition, the decree-holder had filed the sale papers and they were checked and found correct. THEreafter sale notice under Order 21, rule 66, Civil Procedure Code, was ordered. THE initial notice was not served on the judgement-debtor and substituted service was ordered. After substituted service of the sale notice was effected the judgment-debtor entered appearance through advocate and filed counter. In the counter filed, the judgment-debtor claimed benefits of an agriculturist under Act XIII of 1980 and did not specifically dispute the value of the property given by the decree-holder in the sale papers. THE claim of the judgment-debtor was rejected and the execution petition was posted for payment of the decree amount to 21st January, 1980. Front 21st January, 1980 the execution petition was adjourned to 25th January, 1980, as the Presiding Officer was on leave. On 25th January, 1980, the judgment-debtor was absent and the advocate failed to turn up. THEreupon, the learned District Munsif has passed the following orders:

(3.) THE short point for consideration is, whether the petition to set aside the sale filed under sections 47 and 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure is sustainable"