KRISHNARAO AMBADAS PIMPLADKAR Vs. KRISHNARAO RAGHUNATH PALEKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A preliminary objection has been raised that no appeal lies.

(2.) The appellant seeks to get this Court to interfere with an order of the First Class Subordinate Judge, by which he refused to alter the valuation of the property to be sold that was entered in a proclamation of sale, or to adjourn the sale in order to have a further enquiry as to its value. Mr. Shingne objects that these are merely administrative orders and not judicial, so as to entitle the appellant to say that they fall under Section 47 of the Civil Procedure Code. He has cited the authority of the Madras Full Bench in Sivagami Achi v. Subrahiriania Ayyar (1903) I.L.R. 27 Mad. 259, f.b. which is a leading authority on the point, This was a decision with regard to Section 287 of the Code of 1882, corresponding to Order XXI, Rule 66, of the present Code. It was held that none of the proceedings of a rule Court under Section 287 of the Civil P. C., and the rules "framed there under in relation to the proclamation of sale, amounted to an "order" within the meaning of Section 244 (corresponding to Section 47 of the present Code) so as to be appealable as a "decree". It is further remarked that under Section 283 the proceedings are in themselves administrative and not judicial; but that if a sale eventually takes place, objections may be taken to the confirmation of the sale on any of the grounds mentioned in Section 311(corresponding to Order XXI, Rule 90, of the present Code), some of which may relate to the contents of the proclamation.

(3.) This ruling has been followed by the Calcutta, Allahabad and Patna High Courts, cf. Deoki Nandan Singh V/s. Band Singh (1911) 16 C.W.N. 124, Ajudhia Prasad V/s. Gopi Natk (1917) I.L.R. 39 All. 415, Deokinandan Singh V/s. Rajah Dhakeawar Prasad Narain Singh (1916) 2 p.l.j. 13 and Baurendra Nath Mitra V/s. Mritunjay Banarji (1920) 5 p.l.j. 270. The decision has also been followed in various other Madras case a such as Ramanathan Chettiar V/s. Venkatachellam Chettiar and Lanka Rama Naidu V/s. Lanka Ratnahrishna Naidu (1923) 46 M.L.J. 192