SALIL KUMAR DATTA
JYOTISH CHANDRA RAKHIT – Appellant
Versus
PARBATI BALA – Respondent
( 1 ) THIS rule has been obtained against the appellate order dismissing the appeal filed by the decree-holder against an order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, First Court, Alipore allowing an application under Order 21, Rule 90 of the C. P. C. setting aside the sale in execution of the decree. This decree arises out of a suit for partition and it appears that the title of the parties was declared in eight annas share in respect of the suit properties. The value of the portion allotted by the pleader commissioner to the judgment-debtor, the opposite party before me under the decree is Rs. 8,392/ -. It appears that the decree-holder started a title execution case No. 22 of 1970 in respect of the said decree for getting possession of his allotment as also for realisation of the costs of the suit which, I am told, amounts to Rs. 700/ -. In this case it appears that the sale proclamation was served on the judgment-debtor on 29-4-1971 and after the sale proclamation was settled which it appears, was done in absence of the judgment-debtor, the sale was fixed on 8-9-1971 at 10. 30 a. m. On that very day, the decree-holder applied for permission to bid which
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.