Appu Alias Subramania Patter – Appellant
Versus
O. Achuta Menon – Respondent
1. The first point raised in this appeal is that the proclamation of sale was not settled by the Court but that the Commissioner appointed by the Court after the preliminary decree prepared the proclamation of sale and sold the property. It is for the Court to settle the proclamation of sale and it could not delegate that power to the Commissioner appointed by it. Order 21, Rule 66, directs that when any property is ordered to be sold by public auction in execution of a decree the Court shall cause a proclamation of the intended sale to be made in the language of such Court and that such proclamation shall be drawn up after notice to the decree-holder and the judgment-debtor and shall state the time and place of sale and specify as fairly and accurately as possible the property to be sold and a number of other things. It is also contended that no reserve price was mentioned in the proclamation of sale.
2. It is also urged that the appellant was not allowed to bid at the auction. The learned Judge relying upon the report of the Receiver has dismissed the appellants application to set aside the sale, Even if the appellant was aware of the contents of the proclamation prepared
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.