The omission to specify taxes payable to the Municipality in the proclamation of sale did not constitute a material irregularity, and the appellant could not take advantage of this omission, having waived the necessity for a fresh proclamation of sale.

CHANDRA REDDY, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the Judgment of the subordinate Judge, Chittoor, dismissing a petition under Order 21, rule 90 of the code of Civil Procedure.

( 2 ) THE history of this litigation covers a long period but it is not necessary to trace it to its origin. It is sufficient to refer to its immediate past. The first respondent, tirumalai-Tirupathi Devasthanams represented by its Board of Trustees, filed two suits O. S. Nos. 51 and 52 of 1937, for possession of properties which were under the management of the Mahant of the Hathiramjee Mutt, of which the appellant is the present Mahant, and for mesne profits. The suits were decreed as prayed for. Possession of the properties was immediately taken. The enquiry into mesne profits was subsequently held and ultimately a decree for Rs. 2,15,285-1-6 was passed towards mesne profits in both the suits on 31st March, 1951. Complaining against the quantum of the mesne profits, Appeals Nos. 745 and 746 of 1952 were carried to the High Court of Madras. As the judgment-debtor did not obtain stay of execution of the decrees, the decrees were put in execution and the properties belonging to the Mutt were brought to sale. At the auction, the decree-holder, who had permission to bid and set of this dues against the sale price, purchased some of the properties in dispute, in addition to other items not involved in these appeals and the 2nd respondent bought certain properties for Rs. 55,700. Subsequently, the decrees passed by the Sub-Court, Chittoor, in O. S. Nos. 51 and 52 of 1937, were modified by this Court, to which the appeals were transferred, and the decretal amount was reduced to Rs. 1,26,496-0-6 in O. S. No. 51 of 1937 and to rs. 10,773-11-0 in O. S. No. 52 of 1937. This led to the sales of some items being set aside by this Court and the sales being confirmed to the extent sufficient to cover the decree debt as reduced by this Court.

( 3 ) THEREAFTER, proceedings giving rise to this appeal were initiated by the appellant under Order 21, rule 90 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The complaints that formed the subject of that application no longer survive. They were found to be non-existing and no attempt is made to resuscitate them in this appeal.

( 4 ) TWO new grounds, which were not included in the petition were urged at the time of the arguments and it is they that are pressed before us. They are (1) that the taxes payable in respect of the houses were not specified in the proclamation of sale ; and (2) that a copy of the order regarding the proclamation of sale was not affixed in the office of the Municipality within the limits of which the properties under appeal are situate.

( 5 ) THE trial Court disallowed these objections on the ground that the objection as to these defects was waived by the judgment-debtor by the waiver of the necessity for a fresh proclamation on an earlier occasion when he sought the postponement of the sales. It held further that the prices realised were not inadequate and that in any event, the inadequacy of price could not be regarded as the effect of the material irregularities. It is this conclusion of the learned Judge that is assailed before us.

( 6 ) WE have first to consider whether there are any material irregularities falling, within the contemplation of Order 21, rule, 90, Civil Procedure Code. The provision of law which requires the proclamation to be made giving certain particulars is Order 21, rule 66. That rule recites :" (1) Where any property is ordered to be sold by public auction in execution of a decree, the Court shall cause a proclamation of the intended sale to be drawn up in the language of such c ourt. (2) Such proclamation shall be drawn up after notice to the decree-holder and shall state the time and place of sale, and specify as accurately as possible- (a) the property to be sold ; (b) the revenue assessed upon the estate, or part of the estate, where the property to be sold is an interest in an

Click Here to Read the rest of this document