Dave, J.—This is a first appeal in execution proceedings against the order of the Civil Judge, Bikaner, dated the 3rd September, 1954, and arises in the following circumstances : —

On 26th of April, 1953, respondent No. 1 Sushil Kumar, who is a minor, presented an execution application through his next friend and guardian Mst. Gitabai, who is his mother, for execution of a decree, dated 12th July, 1951, against the judgment-debtor Zahur Ahmad The decree was for Rs. 9,525/14/- and the said amount was to be realised from the sale of the mortgaged property which consisted of a house situated in Mohalla Gasiyan at Bikaner. This property was put to auction by the Sales Amin from 4th Jan., 1954 to 7th January, 1954. On the last date, i.e. 7th January, 1954, the highest bid was that of one Gopallal Goswami for Rs. 8,500/-. It was represented to the Court that the bid was low and, therefore, the executing court ordered the Sales Amin to auction the property again on 8th of January, 1954. On that date also the highest bid was Rs. 8,500/- and the bidder deposited l/4th amount of auction price. The judgment-debtor, however, made an application to the court that the property was very valuable, that the bid was very low and therefore, it should be got auctioned again. This request was allowed by the court with the consent of the decree-holder and the property was again put to auction from 26th May, 1954 to 29th May, 1954, The report of the Sales Amin shows that on all the said four dates, the only bidder was Shrinarain Purohit Advocate who is respondent No. 2 in this Court. His bid was for Rs. 4.000/-. It appears from the record of the executing court that the Sales Amin made a report of the said auction on 29th May, 1954, and it was accepted by the learned Judge. It may be mentioned here that the order of the court accepting the bid is written by a clerk and dated 29th May, 1954. The Presiding Officer did not put any date below his signature and the order-sheet shows that the bid was accepted on 31st May, 1954, the day intervening i.e. the 30th of May being a holiday. On the same day the court fixed 16th of July, 1954. for confirmation of the sale. The order-sheet shows that the auction purchaser deposited Rs. 1,000/-on 31st of May, 1954, and the remaining amount of Rs. 3,000/- on 5th of June, 1954.

2. It is common ground between the parties that the judgment-debtor Shri Zahur Ahmad died on the night between the 4th and 5th June, 1954, i.e. on the night prior to the day on which Rs. 3,000/- were deposited by the auction-purchaser.

3. On the 16th of July, 1954, just before the court was going to confirm the sale, two widows of the deceased judgment-debtor, namely Mubarak Begam and Masha Alla Begam presented separate applications for setting aside the sale under O. XXI, r. 90 of the Civil Procedure Code. It was alleged that several irregularities were committed in conducting the sale and that the highest bid, which was accepted by the court was grossly inadequate. It was pointed out that even the previous bid of Rs. 8,500/- of Gopallal was not considered adequate by the court. In the application filed by Masha Alla Begam fraud was also pleaded Both these widows presented further applications on 25th of August, 1954, In the application filed by Mubarak Begam, it was further stated that she and the decree-holder had come to a mutual compromise whereby the decree was completely satisfied and that this may be verified from the decree-holders counsel. It was also mentioned that she was tendering Rs. 200/- to be given to the auction purchaser which was 5% of his auction bid and that the sale should, therefore, be set aside under O. XXI, r. 8y of the Civil Procedure Code. The decree-holders counsel Shri Madan Swaroop Advocate also presented an application in the court on the same date i.e. 24th August, l954, saying that the decree-holder had received the entire amount of the decree from Mubarak Begam through Mst. Kaniz Banu and that the file should b

Click Here to Read the rest of this document