G.R. Selvaraj (Dead) Vs K.J. Prakash Kumar & Others (Supreme Court of India)
Sleeping Debtors Lose Their Say: Judgment-Debtors Barred from Challenging Sale—Failure to Raise Objection Before Proclamation Attracts Order XXI Rule 90(3) Bar- Acquiescence is Fatal: SC Overturns HC, Upholds Long-Final Auction
Supreme Court reversed the Madras High Court’s order which had invalidated an auction sale conducted on 12.09.2002 in execution of a money decree. The execution arose from a 1995 suit filed by the decree-holder, Rasheeda Yasin, for recovery of ₹3.75 lakhs, which was decreed ex parte in 1997. Her execution petition led to repeated attempts to auction the judgment-debtors’ residential property. Because auctions failed for want of bidders, the executing Court repeatedly reduced the upset price after issuing notice to the judgment-debtors, who participated in some stages but later stopped appearing.
Ultimately, the property was sold on 12.09.2002 for ₹11.03 lakhs to auction-purchaser G.R. Selvaraj, who deposited the entire sale consideration & obtained a sale certificate on 10.01.2003. The judgment-debtors then filed an application under Order XXI Rule 90 CPC alleging irregularities in the reduction of upset price & asserting that the entire property need not have been sold. The executing Court dismissed the application, & the appellate Court affirmed. However, in revision, the High Court set aside the sale on the ground that the executing Court had failed to consider whether sale of part of the property could have satisfied the decree, relying on Order XXI Rule 66(2)(a) CPC & earlier SC rulings such as Ambati Narasayya.
