T K P PARAMASIVA THEVAR Vs. PULUKARUPPA THEVAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is concerned with an application to set aside a Court sale of mortgaged property which took place on November 21 1919- It was filed by the 6 defendant on January 17 1920 more than 30 days after the date of the sale and was rejected by the Subordinate Judge as being out of time. The learned District Judge confirmed his order.

(2.) It is now contended that the omission to publish -the sale in Rayagiri, which is the village where the land is situated, was not a mere irregularity but an illegality, that the petition though treated by the Subordinate Judge in his judgment as an application under Order XXI Rule 90 of the Civil P. C. was properly (as it purported to be) one under Section 47 and that the Limitation period in such cases is 3 years under Art. 181 of the 1 schedule of the Limitation Act.

(3.) Assuming that the publication of the sale notice in Sivagiri, the parent village to which the suit land belongs according to the plaint and the mortgage deed, and the failure to publish it in Rayagiri was something more than a material irregularity in publishing the sale, we have to see whether a party to the suit who asks to have the sale set aside has 30 days under Article 166 or 3 years under Art. 181 to come in with his application.