ORDER : These are three matters in which the first two applications wherein interim stay had been granted are coming up for final order and the third civil revision petition is coming up for admission along with the civil miscellaneous petition for grant of stay.

2. The point taken in all these three matters is the same viz., whether the lower Courts notifying in the sale proclamations the decree-holders valuation and the judgment-debtors valuation but without endeavouring to fix its own valuation, even though naturally these contending valuations differ, constitute an error of jurisdiction inviting interference in revision.

3. There is conflict of decisions, as pointed out in the A.I.R. Commentaries on the C. P. Code, 5th Edn., Vol. II, p. 2461. as to whether under this rule a Court is under a duty to state its own estimate of the value of the property to be sold in the sale proclamation. This High Court in Srinivasan v. Andhra Bank Ltd., AIR 1949 Mad 398 (A); Thiruvengadasami v. Govindasami, AIR 1928 Mad 503 (B); Veeraswami v. Kalyanasundaram, AIR 1927 Mad 1009 (1) (C); Thiruvengadasami v. Govindasamy, AIR 1927 Mad 943 (D) and the High Court of Allahabad in Kalka Pershad v