RANI BALA DASI Vs. BENODINI RAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are two composite applications under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Article 227 of the Constitution directed against an order made in an appeal by a Subordinate Judge at Midnapore.

(2.) Two holdings belonging to the Petitioner having been sold, applications under Section 174(3) of the Bengal Tenancy Act were heard analogously by a learned Munsif who on a consideration of the evidence produced held that the impugned sales had been vitiated by material irregularity and fraud in publishing and conducting the sale with the consequence that the Petitioner had suffered substantial injury as a result of such irregularity and fraud. The execution creditor took an appeal which was allowed and the Munsif's order was set aside. It is against this appellate order that the two Rules have been obtained which have been heard together and are disposed of by this judgment.

(3.) In one of the cases the property was said to be of the value of Rs. 2,000 but it was priced very low in the sale proclamation which stated that its value was Rs. 150 only. The decree-holder who was the auction-purchaser, took the property at Rs. 162. In the other case the value of the property was said to be Rs. 150 but the sale proclamation stated the value as Rs. 12 and the actual purchase price tendered by the decree-holder was only Rs. 22. As I have indicated, one of the grounds of impugning the sales was the unconscionably low price mentioned in each of the sale proclamations and the equally low prices fetched at the actual sales.