The decree holder is the petitioner. It is a bank. The decree was one for recovery of money in enforcement' of a mortgage. In execution the hypotheca was brought to sale. It was sold on 15-6-1987 for a sum of Rs. 20001. The sale amount was not sufficient to discharge the decree debt. The judgment debtor No. I and a stranger who claimed that the property had subsequently been agreed to be sold to her filed an

application under Order 21 Rule 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The sale amount and 5% thereof was deposited. The executing court set aside the sale on 21-11-1987. For the balance due under the decree holder filed E.P.251 of 1991. The decree holder sought to attach the property of Judgment Debtor No.1 which had earlier been mortgaged and sold in enforcement of the mortgage decree. This was on the basis that. the property belonged to the judgment debtor on the sale being set aside and since the property had not been sold to the person who had joined the judgment debtor in applying under 0.21 Rule 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the decree holder could proceed against the property. That application was originally dismissed by the executing court. In C.R.P. 504 of