(1.) In Regular Civil Suit No. 2005 of 1986, the trial Court on 20.02.1988 passed a decree for partition and directed an appointment of Commissioner to effect the partition. The parties are held entitled to their shares as specified in paragraph 11 of the judgment, which is reproduced below.
(2.) The appellantoriginal plaintiff is held entitled to 5/12 share in the suit house, whereas the defendant Nos. 1 to 5 together are held entitled to 5/12 share and the defendant Nos. 6 and 7 are held entitled to 1/12 share each. This was a preliminary decree passed by the trial Court and the final decree proceedings were instituted by filing an application, registered as Final Decree Application No. 2005 of 1986. The said application was allowed granting a declaration that the defendant No.1 shall be the purchaser of the suit property and she was directed to deposit 25% of the purchase money with the Nazir under Order XXI, Rule 84 of the Civil Procedure Code.
(3.) The defendant no.1 did not deposit the requisite amount within a stipulated period and there is a controversy in respect of it to the effect that there was extension granted by the executing Court or not. Be that as it may, the executing Court passed an order on 15.04.1997 below Exh.48, setting aside the sale of the property in favour of defendant No.1 and directing fresh auction to be conducted on the finding that there was violation of Order XXI, Rules 84 and 85 of the Civil Procedure Code.