( 1 ) THE revision petitioner seeks to assail the, order dated 12-4-2002 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Suryapet in E. P. No. , 24 of 2000. The facts lie in a narrow compass.

( 2 ) THE revision petitioner is the judgment-debtor and the respondent herein is the decree-holder. The decree-holder filed e. P. No. 24 of 2000 in execution of the decree obtained by him against the Judgment- debtor for sale and thereby for realization of the decretal amount. Eventually, the sale was conducted. Under the impugned docket order, the Executing Court knocked down the sale in favour of the decree-holder,he being the highest bidder. The bid amount was for Rs; 1,68,000/ -. It is now being assailed on the premise that the upset price was reduced to Rs. 1. 60. 000. 00 at the request of the bidders on the ground that the property would not worth more than Rs. 16. 000. 00

( 3 ) IT is the contention of the learned counsel for the revision petitioner that there was no notice of the sale to the judgment- debtor and behind his back, the sale was conducted at throw-away price and therefore, the sale is not valid.

( 4 ) IT may be mentioned here that the revision petitioner has not a