JUDGMENT : The learned counsel for the appellant has given an application to convert this first appeal into an appeal from order. The learned counsel for the respondents have no objection, and hence this appeal is treated as an appeal from order.

2. The appeal is against the order of the lower court rejecting an application to set aside the Court sale held in Darkhast No. 156/50 in Jurisdiction Suit No. 236/47 to recover mortgage money. The contentions of the judgment-debtor contained in that application were all rejected by the lower Court, and they are re-argued in this appeal. The first is that the property was purchased by a person who had acted as a Panch at the time of the valuation of the property. It is, therefore, contended that under Order 21, Rule 73, C.P. Code, the sale is vitiated. Order 21, Rule 73, C.P. Code reads as follows :-

"No officer or other person having any duty to perform in connection with any sale shall, either directly or indirectly, bid for, acquire or attempt to acquire any interest in the property sold".

3. A person who acts as Panch at the time of the valuation of property for the purpose of including the estimation of the value of the property in a pro

Click Here to Read the rest of this document