9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The judgment deals with the issue of extending the time for deposit of non-judicial stamps for engrossing the sale certificate in a civil case. Summary: 1. The Civil Revision Petition was filed by the judgment debtors against the order in E.A. No. 886 of 2008 in E.P. No. 1097 of 2005 in O.S. No. 65 of 2003 seeking permission to deposit the cost of Non-Judicial Stamps for preparation of the sale certificate. 2. The auction purchaser, who bought the property at an auction, failed to deposit the registration fees on Non-Judicial Stamps. The judgment debtors filed an application to set aside the sale under Order XXI, Rule 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The auction purchaser filed for confirmation of the sale, but did not deposit the required stamps. The sale was confirmed before the stamps were deposited, raising questions about the validity of the sale. 3. Respondents contended that the application for extension of time was not maintainable as the decree was already satisfied outside the Court. 4. The Principal Junior Civil Judge allowed the petition to extend the time for deposit of the non-judicial stamps. 5. The judgment debtors appealed against this order. 6. The main issue was whether the lower Court's order to extend the time for depositing non-judicial stamps was legal and sustainable. 7. The Court found that the auction purchaser failed to comply with mandatory provisions regarding depositing the sale consideration and stamps, leading to the sale being considered a nullity. 8. Referring to relevant legal provisions and past judgments, the Court emphasized the mandatory nature of deposit requirements and the lack of power to extend the time for deposit. 9. The Court directed the revision petitioners to deposit deducted amounts with interest, and ordered the return of the remaining deposit and the value of the non-judicial stamps to the auction purchaser. 10. The Civil Revision Petition was allowed with no order as to costs.
|
