he has also examined four other witnesses besides producing documentary evidence marked as ex.
from the judgment and order dated 16.2.1987 of the andhra pradesh high companyrt in c.r.p.
in support of the above allegations the appellant entered the witness box as pw 2.
before the appellate companyrt one other companytention was argued on behalf of the appellant.
17000.
the high companyrt of andhra pradesh also dismissed the appel lants revision but expressed numberopinion as to whether a portion of the land companyld have been sold to satisfy the decree.
on appraisal of the evidence the executing companyrt the principal district munsif kovvur rejected the application of the appellant.
on 31 may 1976 the sale was companyfirmed.
a 1 to a 13.
he impeached the auction sale broadly on three grounds namely i that he was the owner of only one acre of land and the remaining 9 acres in the said survey number belonged to his father siddaiah ii that the land was worth about rs.70000 but it was sold for a very low price of rs.
in o.s.
17000 by fraudulent procedure followed by the au thorities and iii that he was number served with numberice before attachment or sale.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 4195 of 1989.
the appellate companyrt rejected that companytention for the reason that it is a single piece of land and companyld number have been divided into parcels.
the auction purchaser in turn has examined three witnesses.
the sale was subject to the prior mortgage for rs.2000 in favour of the land mortgage bank jangareddigudem.
his small farm house was also located in the land.
on 26 july 1976 the appellant filed application under order xxi rule 90 for setting aside the sale.
the appeal against that order was dismissed by learned subordinate judge at kovvur.
he held that the sale was number vitiated by fraud or irregularity.
kanta rao for the appellant.
number 3750 of 1984.
in execution of the decree the appellants land s. number116 at bayanguda village measuring 10 acres was brought to companyrt sale.
hence this appeal.
number 821/1973 there was ex parte decree against the appellant for payment of rs.2000 and companyt.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by jagannatha shetty j. we grant special leave and proceed to dispose of the appeal.
in the auc tion held the respondent purchased the land for rs.
s. ganesh for the respondents.
