JETHU RAM PREM CHAND Vs. BHAGWAN DASS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition challenging three orders dated 19.01.2016; whereby the objections filed by the petitioners under 21 Rule 90 were dismissed, the application filed by the petitioners for framing issues qua the deposit of amount by auction purchaser within the time prescribed by the CPC; was dismissed, and further; the amount of auction consideration was ordered to be released in favour of the decree-holder.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the Court had issued the proclamation notice qua the sale of the property which was affixed on the notice board of the Court on 16.05.2014. Thereafter, the auction of all the properties of the petitioners, being the judgment debtors, was held on 27.06.2014. Learned counsel has further submitted that the provision of Order 21 Rule 84 CPC requires the auction purchaser to pay 25% of the sale price to the officer conducting the sale, failing which the property would be put to resale forthwith. Still further, the provision of Order 21 Rule 85 CPC mandates upon the auction purchaser to deposit the balance and full amount on or before 15th day during the Court working hour from the date of sale of property. Still further, Order 21 Rule 86 CPC further provides that if the full money is not deposited as mentioned above then the property shall be resold and the money deposited by the defaulting purchaser shall be forfeited. However, the auction purchaser in this case had neither deposited the initial money of 25% nor was the full sale consideration paid to Court within 15 days from the date of sale.

(3.) Accordingly, the petitioners had filed his objection, as is provided under Order 21 Rule 90 CPC, for setting aside the sale.