Skip to content


Baghla Briquette Industries Vs. Punjab Financial Corporation, Chandigarh - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided On
Case NumberF.A.F.O. No. 484 of 1983
Judge
Reported inAIR1986P& H80
ActsCode of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Order 21, Rule 90; Limitation Act - Schedule - Article 127
AppellantBaghla Briquette Industries
RespondentPunjab Financial Corporation, Chandigarh
Excerpt:
.....of a decree or order. thus the contention that against an order passed by a single judge in an appeal filed under section 104 c.p.c., a further appeal lies to a division bench cannot be accepted. the newly incorporated section 100a in clear and specific terms prohibits further appeal against the decree and judgment or order of a single judge to a division bench notwithstanding anything contained in the letters patent. the letters patent which provides for further appeal to a division bench remains intact, but the right to prefer a further appeal is taken away even in respect of the matters arising under the special enactments or other instruments having the force of law be it against original/appellate decree or order heard and decided by a single judge. it has to be kept in mind..........place on 17th aug. 1982. thereafter the court confirmed the sale on 24th aug., 1982. the appellant filed objections against the sale on 6th sept., 1982 which were dismissed vide the impugned order on the ground that the sale had already been confirmed. the judgment-debtor has come up in appeal to this court. 3. the only question that arises for determination is, whether the sale could be confirmed before the expiry of period of limitation provided for filing the objections against the sale. o. 21, r. 90 of the civil p. c. provides that where a property has been sold in execution of a decree, any person whose interests are adversely affected by the sale can apply to the court to set aside the sale on the grounds specified thereon. art. 127 of the limitation act prescribes a period of 60.....
Judgment:

1. This First Appeal has been filed against the order of the Additional District Judge, Bhatinda dt. 6th May, 1963.

2. Briefly the facts are that the property belonging to the appellant-judgment-debtor was got auctioned by the respondent. The auction took place on 17th Aug. 1982. Thereafter the Court confirmed the sale on 24th Aug., 1982. The appellant filed objections against the sale on 6th Sept., 1982 which were dismissed vide the impugned order on the ground that the sale had already been confirmed. The judgment-debtor has come up in appeal to this Court.

3. The only question that arises for determination is, whether the sale could be confirmed before the expiry of period of limitation provided for filing the objections against the sale. O. 21, R. 90 of the Civil P. C. provides that where a property has been sold in execution of a decree, any person whose interests are adversely affected by the sale can apply to the Court to set aside the sale on the grounds specified thereon. Art. 127 of the Limitation Act prescribes a period of 60 days from the date of sale for filing objections. The only inference that can be drawn from the said provisions is that the Court is not empowered to confirm the sale till the period of limitation for objections has expired. If the sale is confirmed before the expiry of the said period, a very valuable right of the party is taken away and it is left without any remedy if it wants to challenge the sale. The cannot be the intention of Legislature. In the present case the objections were filed by the appellant within the prescribed period of limitation but the sale had been confirmed before the date of filing objection. Therefore, in view of the above observation, the orders, of the confirmation of sale and dismissal of objection petition are liable to be set aside.

4. For the aforesaid reasons I accept the appeal, set aside the order of confirmation of sale and dismissal of the objection petition and remand the case to the executing Court to decide the matter afresh after taking into consideration the observations made above. No orders as to costs.

5. Appeal allowed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //