1. The matter arises in execution of the decree and the decree-holder-auction-purchaser is the appellant.

2. The decree in the case was on foot of a hypothecation bond executed by the defendants 1 to 3. In execution thereof, items 1 and 3 which belonged to the 2nd defendant-judgment-debtor were sold in execution on 30-8-1950 when they were purchased by the plaintiff-decree-holder, in full satisfaction of the decree. Within 30 days of the sale, viz. on 28-9-1950 the 2nd defendant applied under Order XXI, R.87, Travancore Civil Procedure Code corresponding to Order XXI, R.90 of the Indian Civil Procedure Code, to set aside the court sale on ground of fraud and material irregularity. On the next day 29-9-1950, the respondent who had purchased the properties in execution of his own money decree filed similar application. These applications were however not proceeded with in view to a stay order obtained by the 2nd defendant in C. M. A. 84 of 1950, taken by him before the District Court against an order under Order IX, R.13, refusing to set aside the ex-parte decree as against him. The District Court, by order dated 5-2-1951, allowed the C.M. appeal on condition that a sum of