K. Sreedharan J.

When C.M.P. No. 1289/95 came up for orders, I heard counsel appearing on either side in detail. I am disposing of the revision petition.

2. Petitioner is the judgment debtor in O.S.46/89 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Kasaragod. That suit was filed by the first respondent bank on the basis of a mortgage executed by the petitioner and others. Mortgage was security for the money transaction with the Bank. When the mortgagors defaulted in repaying the money, Bank instituted the suit. The suit was decreed allowing the Bank to realise the

money by the sale of mortgaged property. For getting the decree executed, the Bank filed E.P. 27/93. The decree holder brought the property for sale. Proclamation was settled under Order XXI Rule 66 of the C.P.C. At the first instance the upset price was fixed at Rs. 2,21,950/-. Subsequently the upset price was reduced to Rs.2 lakhs as per order in E.A. 76/94 dated 4-3-94. Still later the upset price was reduced to Rs.

1,75,000/- as per the Order in E.A. 210/94. It is conceded before me that the property could not be sold in public auction. The decree holder sought permission to purchase the property. Court belo