JUDGMENT

S. C. AGRAWAL, J. : —Leave granted.

2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. These appeals are by the auction purchaser of a property sold to him in execution proceedings. A money decree was passed against respondent No. 1 in O.S. No. 148 of 1970 filed by respondent No. 2. In execution of the said decree the property of respondent No. 1 was sold by auction on March 26, 1985 to the appellant whose bid of Rs. 3,01,000/- was the highest. In the sale certificate dated April 8, 1987 the property that was sold was thus described in the Schedule:

"East Godavari District, Rajahmundry Taluk, Gandhi-nagaram, Block No. II, Rajahmundry belonging to the judgement debtors and named as "Chandrika Nilayam" in S.S. No. 67 and present No. 21-6 terraced house, situated within the following bounderies -

East : House of M. V. Reddy

South : Main Road

West : Park

North : House of Mullapudi Satyanarana"

4. The same description was given in the sale proclamation. Before issuance of the sale certificate respondent No.1 had filed petitions, E.A. Nos. 387 of 1985 and 506 of 1985 under Order 21 Rules 90 and 91, C.P.C. for setting aside the sale which was held on March 26, 1985. One of the grounds that was urged for setting aside the sale in the said petitions was that respondent No. 1 had only 1/4th share in the property and further that the property was worth Rs. 5 lakhs and the bid was too low. Along with the said petitions respondent No. 1 also filed a schedule which gave the description of the property in the same terms as mentioned in the sale proclamation and sale certificate. The said petitions were dismissed by the executing court by order dated April 21, 1986 and the sale was confirmed on April 8, 1987 and the sale certificate was granted to the appellant. In pursuance of the sale certificate the appellant obtained possession of the entire property within the boundaries as mentioned in the sale certificate on April 22, 1987. After the delivery of the possession respondent No. L filed a suit, O.S. No. 107/87, in the court of Subordinate Judge, Rajahmundry for a declaration that the sale certificate dated April 8, 1989 issued in favour of the appellant does not pass title to the property bearing Door. No. 14/7 and relates only to the terraced building and for a permanent injuction restraining the appellant from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of respondent No.1 in respect of the other building. During the pendency of the said suit respondent No.1 filed a petition, E.A. No. 478 of 1990, in the execution proceedings, under Section 47 read with Section 151 C. P. C. Wherein he prayed for a declaration that the sale certificate does not pass title to the appellant in respect of the property mentioned in the schedule to the said application, hereinafter referred to as "the petition schedule property," on the ground that even though there was no attachment and sale of the said property and even though the appellant did not purchase the same and even though the sale certificate does not contain it the appellant had taken the delivery of possession of the said property in the execution proceedings. The boundaries by respondent No. 1 in the said petition (

East : House belonging to M. V. Reddy

West : Terraced building now taken delivery by the first respondent (appellant herein)

South : Main Road

North : House belonging to Mullapudi Satyanarayan

5. The said petition was contested by the appellant as well as by the decree holder (respondent No.2) who asserted that the petition schedule property was also brought to sale after attachment and was in fact sold by the court and it is also covered by the sale certificate. The Subordinate Judge, by order dated November 5, 1991, dismissed the said petition of respondent No. 1. It was held that the petition schedule property is located within the boundaries mentioned in the schedule to the execution petition as well as in the schedule attached to the sale certificate. The subordinate Jud