The High Court framed a substantial question of law as under It is open to the appellants to challenge the sale on the following grounds The property was subject to mortgage and there was companytravention of the sections 35 and 85 of the Karnataka Co operative Societies Act, 1959.
The sale was in breach of Order 21 Rule 64 CPC on the ground that the property sold was worth much more than the amount sought to be recovered.
At the time of hearing of the Second Appeal the High Court has also framed the additional substantial question of law reads The question of law was framed as mentioned supra.
Whether the decree made by the lower appellate companyrt is vitiated for its failure to companysider the points involved in question No.1?
This appeal is filed by the defendants against the judgment passed by the High Court in Second Appeal.
The plaintiffs suit was dismissed by the trial companyrt.
O R D E R CIVIL APPEAL NO.5707 OF 2002 Heard the parties.
In appeal the First Appellate Court companyfirmed the decree of the trial companyrt.
Aggrieved thereby, the plaintiffs filed Second Appeal before the High Court.
Status as debtor of the father of the appellants who suffered decree for money?
