VONTELA SIRAJ Vs. INDIAN BANK PUNGANUR BRANCH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Borrower has filed the above appeal and obtained interim suspension of the operation of the order on 12-4-1993 and the Lower Court was directed not to confirm the sale of the lorry pending further orders of this Court.

(2.) It appears that pursuant to the order of the Lower Court, the lorry was sold in public auction on 12-4-1993 for Rs. 1,97,000/- in favour of the 5th respondent, who was the highest bidder and who has now got impleaded in the C.M.A. By the rime interim suspension was granted by this Court, the auction seams to have been confirmed.

(3.) The contention of Sri S.V. Bhatt, learned Counsel for the appellant, is that the impugned order is in effect, an order passed under Order 39 Rule 6 and that as the ingredients of that provision are not satisfied and as no notice was given to the defendant as required under Order 39 Rule 8, the ex parte order passed by the Lower Court is illegal.