SAL ENTERPRISES SURYAPET Vs. BHIMREDDI LAXMAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner filed O.S.No. 57 of 1996 in the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Suryapet, against the 2nd respondent herein, for recovery of a sum of Rs. 4,49,500/-. The suit was decreed on 16-01-2000. It filed EP.No.1 of 1999(?) (19/2001) for a sum of Rs. 5,69,816/- being the decretal amount. While the suit was pending, it obtained attachment before judgment on 7-10-1996 against an item of property under Order XXXVIII Rule 1 CPC by filing I.A, No. 413/1996.

(2.) The 1st respondent has also filed O.S.No. 65/1996 in the same Court against the 2nd respondent for foreclosure of the mortgage in his favour for a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-. This suit was decreed exparte. On the basis of this ex parte decree, he filed E.P.No. 1 of 1999. Since the 1st respondent had precedence over other claimants in view of specific provisions of Section 58 of the Transfer of Property Act, he sought for sale of the mortgaged property by filing E.P. No. 1/1999 because the 2nd respondent did not satisfy the decree. Certain publications were made in the newspapers. The 2nd respondent raised some objections. On account of the same, sale could not be proceeded with. Ultimately, the auction of the suit schedule property was held on 13-12-2001.

(3.) The petitioner filed E.A.No. 42/2002 in E.P.No. 1/1999 raising an objection that adequate publicity was not given before the sale was effected. It was contended that the value of the property is around Rs.6,00,000/-wereas the auction has fetched only a sum of Rs. 3,12,000/-. The E.A. was dismissed by the Executing Court through its order dated 17-12-2003. Hence, this Revision.