Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O. XXI, r. 90

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XXI, r. 90-,Execution sale, setting aside of-Fraud-"A" decree-holderpurchasing property in auction sale-Property again put to sale and auction purchased by Bin separate suit against A-"C" owner of property subsequently praying for setting aside of former auction sale on plea of fraud by A-Contention that relief could not be granted unless subsequent auction also set aside-First auction sale in favour of A when set aside second sale, held, also falls through and no separate proceeding required for setting it aside-"A" judgment debtor in second execution case, in circumstances, held, acquired no saleable interest in property by virtue of first execution sale-----Order setting aside first execution sale under r. 90, O. XXI, in circumstances, held, superseded second sale. Mundla Pati Jagannadha Rao and others v. Rachapudi Basawayya A I R 1927 Mad. 835 ; Muthu Kumarasamia Pillai v. Kuthushami Thevan A I R 1927 Mad. 394 and Gouri v. Ude and others A I R 1942 Lah. 153 ref. Dates of hearing : 10th and 16th November 1969.                                                                                                     JUDGMENT The two revisions arise out of a proceeding under Order XXI, rule 90 of the Code of Civil Procedure for setting aside an auction sale held on October 21, 1952. This judgment and order will determine both the cases. In Money Execution Case No. 128 of 1952 Khagendra Bejoy Das, the decree-holder, who is the petitioner in Civil Revision No. 384 of 1966, auction purchased on October 21, 1952, the property in dispute for Rs. 99 belonging to the two judg ment-debtors, Niranjan Sen and Hari Ranjan Sen, opposite-parties Nos. 5 and 6 in both the revisions. After confirmation of the sale possession is said to have been delivered on March 13, 1953. On July 4, 1956, Khagendra leased the property to two persons : Abut Faiz and Abu Naser. The…