Burn, J.

1. This appeal is from an order of the learned Subordinate Judge of Trichinopoly. in E.A. No. 8 of 1935 dismissing the appellants application, under Order 21, Rule 90 and Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure to set aside a sale held in execution of the decree in O.S. No. 6 of 1927. The final decree in the suit was passed on 23rd February, 1933 and the sale was held on 28th November, 1934. Several irregularities were alleged on behalf of the judgment-debtor. The learned Subordinate Judge held that no irregularities had been made out and also held that the lands had been sold for reasonable prices and that therefore no substantial loss had been caused. He therefore dismissed the petition.

2. In appeal Mr. Sitarama Rao for the appellant has pressed before us strongly the contention that the sale was illegal. The sale was fixed for 21st November, 1934. On the 21st of November, 1934, the judgment-debtor put in an application under Order 41, Rule 6, Sub-rule (2) praying that the sale might be stayed for two months on the ground that appeals were pending against the final decree and from an order of the Court on the application to set aside the preliminary decree in th