AIR 1977 SUPREME COURT 1789 ::1977 3 SCC 337 ::1977 Mad LJ (Cri) 428 ::(1977) 2 SCC 699 ::1977 SCC (Cri) 404 ::ILR (1977) 1 Kant 617

Supreme Court Of India

(From: Andhra pradesh)*

Hon'ble Judge(s): P. N. Bhagwati, S. Murtaza Fazal Ali , JJ

Civil P.C. (5 of 1908) , O.21 R.64— Objection as to saleability of property - Two decrees in favour of D. H. against J. D. - Execution sale - Amount of one decree alone mentioned in the sale proclamation - Two items of properties offered for sale - Amount fetched at the sale of one item sufficient to satisfy the amount mentioned in the sale proclamation - Sale of the second item - Vitiated although the total amount of two decrees was not exceeded. Under the provisions of O. 21. Rule 64, it is manifest that where the amount specified in the proclamation of sale for the recovery of which the sale was ordered is realised by sale of certain items, the sale of further items should be stopped. This is the logical corollary which flows from O. 21. R. 64. Under that provision the Executive Court derives jurisdiction to sell properties attached only to the point at which the decree is fully satisfied. The words "necessary to satisfy the decree" clearly indicate that on sale can be allowed beyond the decretal amount mentioned in the sale proclamation. In other words, where the sale fetches a price equal to or higher than the amount mentioned in the sale proclamation and is sufficient to satisfy the decree, no further sale should be held and the Court should stop at that stage.(Para 3) Where the decree-holder had obtained another decree a....