Srinivasan, J.

A preliminary objection has been raised by the respondent, as to the maintainability of this appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent.

2. The respondent obtained a decree in O.S. No. 192 of 1974 and in execution of the same, brought the properties to sale. Sale was held which was sought to be set aside by the appellant herein by an application under O.21, Rule 90, Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code) read with Sec.151 of the Code. The application was dismissed by the Executing Court and on appeal in C.M.A. No.775 of 1986, a single Judge of this Court affirmed the order of the Executing Court, it is against the said order, the present L.P. Appeal has been filed.

3. An objection is raised by the respondent that the C.M.A. filed in this Court was under Sec.104, read with O.43, Rule l(j) of the Code and therefore, by virtue of the provision of Sec.l04(2) of the Code, no further appeal will lie from an order passed in the said appeal. In support of the said contention, reliance is placed on a recent judgment of the Supreme Court in Resham Singh Piyara Singh v. Abdul Sattar, (1996)1 C.T.C. 185: (1996)1 L. W. 357. In that case, a su