In Brief
A judgment debtor sought to set aside an auction sale of her property on grounds of procedural irregularities, including inadequate notice, defective publication, and undervaluation. The Supreme Court held that merely proving material irregularity is insufficient to set aside a sale under Order 21 Rule 90(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The applicant must demonstrate that the irregularity caused substantial injury. Here, the execution court properly published the sale through newspapers and beat of drums, securing seven bidders, properly listed valuations, and gave adequate 15-day notice. Finding no material irregularities and no substantial injury, the Supreme Court restored the execution court's order, upholding the auction sale.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.