AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Das, J.—Mr. Jayaswal, on behalf of the Appellants, has no objection to the sale of the villages other than village Prasad but he contends that we ought to set aside the sale of village Prasad. It appears that the Court fixed the valuation of village Prasad at Rs. 16,112. The decree-holder did not accept this valuation and he assessed it at Rs. 3664-3-0. The sale proclamation settled by the Court gave the valuation of the Court and also that of the decree-holder and it is contended before us by Mr. Jayaswal on the authority of Beni Prasad v. Edal Singh (1918) 4 P.L.J. 37: 49 I.C. 195 that the insertion of any valuation in sale proclamation other than the valuation fixed by the Court is calculated to mislead intending bidders and that it is therefore wrong.
We set aside the sale of village Prasad and direct that the valuation stated by the decree-holder in the sale proclamation be struck off and that the sale do proceed on the valuation already fixed by the learned Subordinate Judge. There will be no order as to costs.
Macpherson, J.
I agree.