Skip to content


Mathura Das Vs. Nathuni Lall Mahta and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1885)ILR11Cal731
AppellantMathura Das
RespondentNathuni Lall Mahta and anr.
Excerpt:
sale in execution of decree - civil procedure code (act xiv of 1882), sections 294 and 311--decree-holder bidding at sale without permission of the court--substantial injury. - .....294 of the code, it is discretionary with the court of execution to set aside a sale in which the decree-holder has purchased without the permission of the court having been first obtained. in dealing with such a matter, which we regard as an irregularity in conducting the sale, it should be taken into consideration whether any substantial injury has resulted, that is to say, whether, by reason of the decree-holder being the purchaser without permission of the court previously obtained, an inadequate price has been realized at the sale. the judgment-debtor, appellant, has been unable to show us that the judgment of the lower court, in holding that there was no such substantial injury, is incorrect. there are other irregularities alleged by the appellant in publishing the proclamations;.....
Judgment:
ORDER

Prinsep and Grant, JJ.

1. Under the terms of the third para, of Section 294 of the Code, it is discretionary with the Court of execution to set aside a sale in which the decree-holder has purchased without the permission of the Court having been first obtained. In dealing with such a matter, which we regard as an irregularity in conducting the sale, it should be taken into consideration whether any substantial injury has resulted, that is to say, whether, by reason of the decree-holder being the purchaser without permission of the Court previously obtained, an inadequate price has been realized at the sale. The judgment-debtor, appellant, has been unable to show us that the judgment of the lower Court, in holding that there was no such substantial injury, is incorrect. There are other irregularities alleged by the appellant in publishing the proclamations; but it is unnecessary to consider them having regard to the finding that no substantial injury has resulted at the sale.

2. The appeal is dismissed with costs.


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