- (1.) THIS revision petition has been filed by the judgment-debtor against the judgment of the Additional District Judge, Amritsar, dated December 9, 1977.
(2.) BRIEFLY the facts are that on October 16, 1970, Smt. Parkash Kaur mortgage a house situated in Katra Sher Singh, Amritsar, to Smt. Sandhooran, for an amount of Rs. 5,000.00 vide a registered mortgaged deed. There was an arbitration clause in the deed wherein it was provided that any dispute arising between the parties would be referred to arbitration. A dispute arose between the parties regarding the payment of the amount and consequently the matter was referred to the arbitration of Mr. Kartar Singh Bagga, who held that Smt. Sandhooran was entitled to recover the amount of Rs. 5,812. 50, with interest thereon by sale for the mortgaged property. The award was filed in the Court and it was made a rule of the Court. Smt. Sandhooran filed an execution application against the judgment-debtor in the Court of Subordinate Judge First Class, Amritsar, who on July 27, 1974, ordered sale of the property. In pursuance of that order the property was sold on August 30, 1974 and was purchased by Suresh Kumar respondent. On the same day, that is, Aug. 30, 1974, Smt. Sandhooran, judgment-debtor filed an application under Ss. 47, 60 and 151 read with O. 41, R. 6 of the Civil P. C. , stating that no notice under O. 21, R. 66 of the Code had been served on her and consequently the property could not be sold. She prayed that the sale be stayed. In spite of the application, the property was sold. Thereafter on September 16, 1974, another application was filed by the judgment-debtor alleging that the sale of the property was null and void, that there the property was null and void, that there had been material irregularities and fraud in publishing and conducting the sale and that the petitioner's interest had been seriously affected on account of irregularities and fraud. She prayed that the sale of the house be set aside. While the above application was pending, she moved another application on September 23, 1974, under O. 21, R. 89 of the Code stating that she was ready to deposit the decretal amount of Rs. 5,846. 50 and Rs. 3,800.00, 5% of the sale proceeds, and she may be allowed to do so. She further prayed that the sale for the property be set aside. On January 25, 1975, she moved yet another application that the decree-holder had withdrawn the amount deposited by her and, therefore, the sale was liable to be set aside. On November 23, 1974, the counsel for the judgment-debtor made a statement that he did not want to pursue his application dated September 16, 1974. The applications were opposed by he decree-holder.
(3.) THE executing Court held that notice under O. 21, R. 66 had been served upon the judgment-debtor and that application under O. 21, R. 89 was not maintainable. Consequently it dismissed the objection petition of the judgment-debtor. She went up in appeal before the Additional District Judge, Amritsar, who dismissed it. She has come up in revision to this Court.;