- (1.) IN pending execution application, by stating that the Civil Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the said application, objection application was filed by the petitioner. It has further been stated that the auction proceedings were not conducted in a fair manner. That application was dismissed. The Court below has stated that the sale was confirmed on 18.4.1996 and within the stipulated period, no objection was raised to the auction proceedings. As such, objection to that extent, this Court feels, was rightly rejected. Further objection of the petitioner that the recovery has wrongly been effected against him, was also dismissed on the ground that executing Court has no jurisdiction to go behind the decree passed. Decree against the petitioner was passed before the year 1996, thereafter, auction proceedings were conducted and sale certificate was issued on 18.4.1996.
(2.) AT this stage, it is not open to the petitioner to say that decree has wrongly been passed. No case is made out for interference.;