DATTATRAYA KRISHNA ASHTAPUTRE Vs. JAGANNATH AHAMRAO DESHPANDE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision application against the judgment of the learned District Judge of Satara, in the matter of the execution of a decree.

(2.) The facts were, that the judgment-debtor's property was put up for sale, and was sold. After this had been done the judgment-debtor made an application under Order XXI, Rule 89, of the Civil Procedure Code, and deposited Rs. 1,076, in Court; Rs. 1,005 equalling the amount realized at the auction sale, Rs. 58 representing the five per cent, of the purchase money, required to be paid to the purchaser, and Rs. 16 being poundage. The sum specified in the proclamation of sale had been Rs. 1,384.

(3.) The question now before us is, whether this payment by the judgment-debtor was sufficient to comply with the provisions of Rule 89 of Order XXI. It appears that when these proceedings were taken in the Subordinate Judge's Court, the plaintiff had made an application stating that: In the above mentioned matter the property has been sold by auction and the amount has come into the Court. Plaintiff and defendant are negotiating for a compromise for the remaining sum which is due. Plaintiff does not want to claim that sum for the present. It is prayed that this darkhast should be disposed of. The judgment debtor also made an application to the same purpose, stating that he had deposited the amount of Rs 1,076 in Court, that the plaintiff had applied to the effect that she did not wish to claim the sum remaining due on the darkhast, and that the debt, so far as this darkhast went, had been satisfied. He, therefore, prayed that the sale which had taken place should be set aside.