T S RAMASWAMY AYYANGAR Vs. MLMRAMANATHAN CHETTIAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal arising out of an application to set aside a sale in execution of the mortgage decree in O.S. No. 11 of 1917, under Order 21, Rule 90, Civil P.C. The mortgage itself being subsequent to a prior mortgage the decree directed the sale subject to the prior mortgage. The Subordinate Judge dismissed the petition without enquiring into the petitioner's allegations. There was an appeal to the High Court and the case was sent back for further enquiry by Spencer and Venkatasubba Rao, JJ. The matter has been fully enquired into by the present Subordinate Judge of Dindigul and the petition has been again dismissed. The petitioner appeals.

(2.) The sale is sought to be set aside on account of the following material irregularities in making the proclamation and affecting the sale. (1) The property consists of various parcels of land situated in six villages and it was directed to be sold in one lot instead of being sold separately, thus reducing the number of possible bidders, and as the whole property is certainly worth about three lakhs a number of purchasers were deterred from joining in the sale and bidding. (2) The proclamation was not properly published in all the six villages; and (3) The market value fixed in the proclamation was too low.

(3.) It is said that these irregularities have led to substantial injury to the petitioner as the properties were sold for a gross under-value. The appellants have also taken another question which, it is alleged, is a question of jurisdiction and makes the sale null and void. It is said that the property that was advertised for sale was only the equity of redemption of the first mortgage, whereas what was sold was the whole property free of all encumbrances and it is contended that this irregularity is so gross as to make the sale a nullity.