Challenging the judgment dated 26th March, 2014 in C.M.A. No.12 of 2013 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Cherthala, the petitioner/2nd decree holder came up under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The said judgment was by the first appellate court, against the order dated 13.3.2013 in E.A.No.499 of 2011 in E.P.No.122 of 2009 in O.S.No.513 of 2006 (Ext.P5). The said application in E.A.No.449 of 2011 was filed by the judgment debtor under Order XXI Rule 90 of CPC to set aside the sale conducted on 10.11.2011. The main allegation set forth is that the upset price shown in the proclamation schedule is not reflecting the actual value of the property as the property was having a value of more than 25 lakhs per cent and that what was sold is only half a cent and it would fetch an amount of 12,50,000/-, but it was sold for an amount of 1,05,500/-. The second respondent who purchased the property in court auction contested the application disputing the claim of the judgment debtor. The trial court, on consideration of Ext.C1(a) and after hearing both the parties, dismissed the application by its order dated 13.3.2013, against which C.M.A.No.12 of 2013 was