Objections preferred by the petitioner fall under Order 21 Rule 90 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short – CPC), under which sale can be set aside on the basis of irreuglarity or fraud. In the instant case, no irregularity or fraud in auction sale of petitioner's property is proved. Auction-purchaser is not proved to be relative of DH. Moreover, even if auction-purchaser be relative of the DH, this by itself, would not amount to fraud or irregularity in the auction sale. There is also no evidence to depict that market value of the property sold was Rs.3,00,000/-. Moreover, in auction sale in execution proceedings, the property sold would never fetch the market price because the auction-purchaser would never be sure whether he would get the property at all or not and even if he gets it, it takes several years. Even in the instant case, the sale has been confirmed by impugned order dated 02.12.2011 i.e. more than 3½ years after the auction had been held. Thus, money of auction-purchaser remains blocked and he also does not get the fruits of the property purchased by him in auction.
