ORDER:- This appeal involves an interesting question of law arising out of two inconsistent provisions, one occurring in the Limitation Act and the other occurring in the Civil Procedure Code.

1A. The appellants herein were the judgment debtors in O.S. No. 244 of 1961, on the file of the Sub - Court, Coimbatore. The decree in the said suit was put in execution in E.P.No. 281 of 1977 and the appellants' properties had been sold in court auction on 21-1-1977, for a sum of Rs. 45060. The appellants came forward with a petition in E.A. No.202 of 1978 on 24-1-1978 to set aside the sale on depositing the entire decree amount, commission and poundage under O.21, Rule 89, C.P. Code.

2. The said application for setting aside the sale was opposed by the auction purchaser on the ground that the deposit had been made beyond 30 days from the date of the sale and, therefore, it was not maintainable. The decree holder, however, did not file any counter opposing the application. The court below upheld the objection put forward by the auction purchaser that as the deposit had not been made within 30 days from the date of the sale as per order 21, Rule 92 (2) of the application for setting as