G.T.NANAVATI, K.RAMASWAMY
Seethammal – Appellant
Versus
Senthil Finance – Respondent
ORDER
Leave granted.
Heard learned counsel for both the parties.
2. In-execution of money decree in O.S. No. 67/87, the property, i.e., 1053 sq. feet of land with built-in house was sold for a sum of Rs. 15,100/- subject to discharge of the mortgage sum of Rs. 40,000/- encumbered on the property. The appellant/judgment-debtor questioned the validity of the sale under Order 21, Rule 97, CPC. The executing Court rejected the same which was confirmed in C.R.P. No. 1895/93 by the impugned order dated September 26,1993 of the High Court of Madras. Thus this appeal.
3. Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, we are of the view that the sale is in excess of the execution. It is not in dispute that the property sold consists of a built-up house in a portion measuring 1053 sq. ft. The property was originally valued for a sum of Rs. 75,000/-. But subsequently, it was reduced to Rs. 50,000/-. At an auction, it was sold for a mere sum of Rs. 15,100. The upset price was Rs. 15,000/-. The respondent s bid was for Rs.15,100/- and the sale was knocked down as stated earlier, subject to the discharge of the mortgage for a sum of Rs, 40,000/-. It is now stated by Mr. A.T.M. Sampath,
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.