Firm Madho Ram Naurata Ram vs Dwarka Dass and others

Chopra, J.—This is a petition to revise an order of Sub-Judge II Class, Rajpura ordering re-sale of the attached property on account of the non-deposit of the sale price by the auction purchaser. In execution of a money decree of the appellant some agricultural land of the judgment-debtor was attached and got sold through the Collector. The property was auctioned on 17-12-1949 by the Tehsildar and the highest bid of Rs. 1705/- of the decree-holder himself was accepted. The relevant papers were then sent to the Executing Court. The Sub-Judge by his order dated 31-5-50 asked the decree-holder to deposit the balance of the sale price after deducting Rs. 1574/8/-, the amount due to him on the decree. Order 21 R. 85, C.P.C. requires the full amount of the purchase money payable to be deposited in the Court on the 15th day from the sale of the property. The decree-holder, however, did not deposit the amount till 14-7-50, when he submitted an application that he may be allowed to deposit the amount. This was allowed and the amount was deposited that day. The judgment-debtor then raised an objection that the property must be resold as required by O. 21, R. 86. The Executing Court accepted the objection and ordered the property to be resold.

It has been repeatedly held that the provisions of O. 21, R. 85 are precise and mandatory, and no option is left to the Court to condone a noncompliance with them. The Court might only have a discretion with respect to the forfeiture of the amount deposited by the auction purchaser, but no such discretion is left to the Court in the matter of resale of the property. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the Executing Court by accepting the amount after the due date should be deemed to have extended the time and the property should not have been ordered to be resold thereafter. He has, however, not been able to cite any authority in support of his contention which appears to me to be without any substance. On the default of the auction purchaser to pay the balance of the purchase money within 15 days of the sale, the sale was automatically cancelled and the auction purchaser forfeited all claims to the property.

The counsel has not been able to make out any case for interference. The petition is. consequently, dismissed with costs. The counsel fee would be Rs. 20/-. The parties have been directed, through their counsel, to appear before the Sub Judge Rajpura on 6-8-1951.