( 1 ) THIS revision petition arises out of an order made on an application under Order XXI Rule 90 for setting aside a re-sale and is concerned with the scope of the word "forthwith" occurring in Order XXI Rule 84 of the code of Civil Procedure.

( 2 ) A few more facts are necessary to appreciate the contention urged in execution of a decree, against the petitioner, his immoveable property was brought for sale at 10-45 A. M. on 27th July, 1966. There were several intending purchasers. One Mahabaleshwar offered the highest bid of Ra. 10,000. The bid was accepted, but the purchaser did not deposit 25% of the sale price as required under Order XXI Rule 84 of the Code of Civil procedure. The matter was brought to the notice of the Court. The Court cancelled the sale and directed a re-sale. At the time, the decree-holder, the respondent before me, came forward with a prayer for leave to bid and setoff under Or. 21, Rule 72. The leave was granted and the sale was held at about 5-45 P. M. on the same day. The decree-holder was the only person present and offered the bid. His bid was accepted, and the property was sold for Rs. 622-81. That was the decretal amount.

( 3 ) THE re-sale was foll

Click Here to Read the rest of this document