JAYACHANDRA REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THIS matter has come up again before us and the question once again to be resolved is whether L. P. A. lies.

( 2 ) THE appellant is no other than the judgment-debtor. The plaintiff laid the suit on a mortgage deed and obtained a decree. The property involved is a small residential site in Tirupathi town. An execution petition was filed and the house was brought to sale. The plaintiff, that is, the decreeholder is no other tluni the auction purchaser. Since, then the trouble started. When E. P. was filed, the judgment-debtor, at the time of confirmation, took several objections including the fact that the value given by the Amin was low, so on and so forth. The trial Judge went into that question and by his order dated 30-1-87 dismissed the E. A. As against that, c. M. A. 161/87 was filed and that was also dismissed by the learned single judge. Aggrieved by the said order, L. P. A. 14/88 was filed in this Court and a Division Bench of this Court dismissed the L. P. A. upholding the preliminary objection that it is not maintainable. But, we have held that a combined reading of the provisions leads to the conclusion that an appeal lies under Order 43 Rule (

Click Here to Read the rest of this document