JUDGMENT

Ruma Pal, J.—Leave granted.

2. The appellant had purchased certain property in a Court sale. The High Court has set aside the sale. The decision of the High Court has been impugned in this appeal.

3. The disputed property was the subject matter of a suit for partition between the respondents or their predecessors-in-interest. The property was not partible. The Trial Court accordingly directed sale of the suit property. An Advocate Commissioner was appointed to sell the suit property. The order directing sale required the Advocate Commissioner “to sell the suit property in auction between the parties to the suit or in public auction, if the parties are not coming forward after following the due procedure like giving wide publicity”.

4. The Advocate Commissioner issued notice to the parties to the suit through their respective advocates on 25th June, 2002. The notice said that the warrant of commission would be executed by the sale of the property on 30th June, 2002 by auction and that the parties were at liberty to participate in the auction if they desired to. The Commissioner also pasted notices on the wall of the suit property and distributed pamphlets advertising the sale i