LAWS(PVC)-1930-8-18

SM ANARJAN BIBI Vs. CHANDRAMANI SHAHA

Decided On August 19, 1930
SM ANARJAN BIBI Appellant
V/S
CHANDRAMANI SHAHA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question which arises for decision in these appeals is whether an application for delivery of possession by an auction-purchaser under Order 21, Rule 95, Civil P. C, has to be made within three years from the date of confirmation of the sale or from any later date. It was contended in the Court below on behalf of the respondent auction-purchaser that the time should run against him from the date of issue of the sale certificate, and the said Court has upheld that contention.

(2.) The sales in these eases took place on 10 February 1923. Applications to set them aside were made by the judgment-debtor on 2? February, 1923, but were dismissed on 15 April 1924. On 22 April, 1924 the sales were con-firmed, and draft sale certificates were prepared. The judgment-debtor appealed against the order refusing to set the sales aside. These appeals were eventually on 17 March 1927. In the beginning of May 1928 the auction-purchasers supplied the stamps for the sale certificates, which were then issued on 19 May and 5 June 1928 respectively. The applications under Order 21, Rule 95, Civil P.C., were made on 10 September 1928.

(3.) There can be no question that Art. 180, Schedule 1, Limitation Act, is the article to be applied. Under that article the period of three years prescribed would run from the date when the sale becomes absolute. Order 21, Section 92, Civil P. C, says that on the sale being confirmed, it shall! become absolute. It is not possible to get over the position that time would run from the date of confirmation of the sale. This view has ba8n taken in two unreported decisions of this Court which directly cover the point, Neckbar V/s. Prakash Chandra A.I.R.1930 Cal. 86 and M. A. No. 148 of 1927, decided on 11 February 1929. The date on which the sale becomes absolute is recognized as a distinct and separate date from the date on which the sale certificate is actually issued, because Order 21, Rule 94, says that though the grant of the certificates will follow the confirmation and consequently must be subsequent to the sale becoming absolute, the sale certificate shall bear date the day on which the sale became absolute.