BACHI RAM Vs. SWAMI SANTOSHA NANDJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a First Appeal from Order dated 8 -2 -1991 refusing to set aside the auction sale under Rule 92 of Order 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short the Code). The facts relating to the case are that a decree for recovery of money was passed in favour of the decree -holder respondent and against the judgment debtor appellant. In the execution of that decree, the immovable property of the judgment debtor was attached and was put to auction safe. The decree -holder respondent was the highest bidder hence the auction sale was confirmed in his favour. The judgment debtor preferred an objection under Order 21 Rule 90 of the Code alleging irregularity and fraud in publishing and conducting the sale as required by Rule 90(1) of Order 21 of the Code. Learned District Judge has refused to set aside the sale under Rule 92 of Order 21 of the Code, hence the present appeal from order refusing to set aside sale has been preferred by the judgment debtor.

(2.) SRI Rajendra Dobhal, learned counsel for the appellant has urged that no information was given about the auction sale and that the decree -holder himself was the auction purchaser. He further urged that the amount offered at the auction sale was inadequate and fraud was committed in publishing and conducting the sate, consequently the order for setting aside the auction sale ought to have been passed by the learned judge. He has erred in not considering the objections under Rule 90 of Order 21 of the Code. He further urged that for wheat crop standing in the plot, no auction was held and no amount has been offered by the auction purchaser as required by Rule 74 of Order 21 of the Code.

(3.) THE court below has recorded a finding of fact that on so many occasions, the judgment debtor was informed about the auction sale. The Vakil commissioner had also informed the Judgment debtor before the auction sale. Apart from that, proclamation was also made in the newspaper named "Hindu Hardwar". The court has also taken precautions to get the notices about the auction sale published on the notice board of the Tehsil and also on the notice board of the civil Court. Thus, court below has recorded a finding of fact that there was sufficient publication made in the newspaper and by other modes the appellant was informed before auction sale. As regards the next limb of argument about the inadequacy of the sale consideration, that itself cannot be material point to be considered.