PANJA RAMACHANDRA RAO Vs. GURRAJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One Panjab Venkataratnam was adjudicated insolvent on the 8 September 1919, upon his own application as a debtor presented on the 15 April 1919. The properties of the insolvent were vested in the Official Receiver by an order of 19 April 1921. The Official Receiver sold on 19 August 1921, the entire family property of which the insolvent was the manager, and the properties were purchased by the first respondent, P. Gurraju. There was a second sale of the insolvent's share only on the 26 of November 1921. The order of the District Judge, now appealed against, has the effect of rescinding the Official Receiver's order refusing to confirm the first sale, and it follows, therefore, that if the District Judge's order is upheld the second sale is no longer a valid and good sale. For, if the first sale was a good one there was nothing to sell at the second sale, the whole family property having been sold at the first sale.

(2.) The appellant in C.M.A. No. 28 of 1922 is the son of the insolvent. The appellant in C.M.A. No. 29 of 1932 is the purchaser at the second sale.

(3.) Three main objections have been taken to the District Judge's order. First it is contended that the sale of 19 August 1921 was bad, as the purchase-money was, not paid within the time given in the proclamation of sale, nor even within the time for which an extension was given.