Report No. 139

Urgent need to Amend Order XXI, Rule 92(2), Code of Civil Procedure to Remove an Anomaly which Nullifies the Benevolent Intention of the Legislature and Occasions Injustice to Judgment-debtors Sought to be Benefited

Chapter 1

Introduction

1.1. A dimension of law which speaks in two inconsistent voices.-

As the law stands today, a judgment-debtor or a person claiming interest in a property sold in execution of a decree desirous of making recourse to the valuable right conferred on him under Order XXI, rule 89(1) for setting aside the sale of the auctioned property on making an application in that behalf accompanied by the amount prescribed by the said provision is faced with an impossible situation. Because, he is required to-

(1) make an application "on his depositing in court" the required amount, that is to say, on the application being accompanied by the deposit in court;

(2) make the application within 60 days so that he can collect the requisite amount from the Bank (the Legislature being of the opinion that this process would require a period longer than 30 days but less than 60 days);

(3) the application which can be made within 60 days along with the deposit must be made on depositing the amount within 30 days though the Legislature recognised that more than 30 days would be needed and has accordingly enlarged the time for making application from 30 days to 60 days.