We consider that this appeal should be heard by a Full Bench as it raises a question of some importance relating to the application of Order 32, rule 7, of the Code of Civil Procedure.

The plaintiff and defendants 5 and 6 are the sons of the fourth defendant. The first defendant obtained a decree in O. S. No. 88 of 1929 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Bapatla, for the amount due under a promissory note executed by defendants 3 and 4. In execution of that decree, the properties in suit which were the ancestral properties of the fourth defendant’s family were attached and brought to sale subject to a mortgage which had been executed by the fourth defendant in favour of the first defendant. In the Court auction, the properties were purchased by one Vajja Bapiraju, the brother of the second defendant. He is alleged to be the clerk of the first defendant. The properties were sold for a sum of Rs. 205 subject to the mortgage in favour of the first defendant, on 29th February, 1932. On 29th March, 1932, an application was filed by the maternal grandfather of the plaintiff as his guardian (the plaintiff being then a minor) to set aside the sale under Order 21, r