CR 1664/99 Chaman Prakash & Ors. Vs. Pratap Singh through LR and Ors. (1) In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan At Jaipur Bench, Jaipur O R D E R In S.B. Civil Revision Petition No.1664/1999 Chaman Prakash and others Vs. Pratap Singh through LR and others Date Of Order :: 20th October, 2009 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jitendra Ray Goyal Mr. O.P. Agrawal on behalf of Mr. S.C. Gupta, for petitioners Mr. S.N. Kumawat ] Mr. Pankaj Jain on behalf of ] for respondents. Mr. Manu Bhargava ........... By The Court :- This revision petition under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been filed by the petitioners against the order dated 12/2/1999 passed by Additional District Judge No.2, Alwar in Execution No.6/1982 whereby he refused to confirm auction sale and ordered that the property attached be re-auctioned. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties on the point of admission and perused the impugned order. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that Executing Court wrongly declined to confirm the sale in favour of petitioners who were the highest bidders of the land in dispute. It was then submitted that this auction took place in 1995 when the price of the land in question was not more than Rs.5000-6000 per bigha but the Executing CR 1664/99 Chaman Prakash & Ors. Vs. Pratap Singh through LR and Ors. (2) Court without assigning any good reason ordered for re- auction on the ground of inadequate bid amount. 4. Learned counsels for the respondents supported the impugned order and contended that trial court taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances rightly ordered for re-auction. 5. I have considered the rival submissions made at the bar. The Executing Court while confirming the sale of the immovable property has also to consider whether the bid amount is near about correct value of the auctioning property and in case it finds that amount is inadequate in proportion to the value of the immovable property, the confirmation of the sale may be declined. Here in the case on hand, the Executing Court considered this aspect and found that auction price is not good enough in proportion to the value of the attached immovable property and ordered for re- auction. I do not find any illegality or impropriety in the approach of the learned Executing Court in the fact situation of this case. Therefore, this revision petition deserves to be dismissed at the admission stage. 6. Consequently, this revision petition along with stay application is dismissed at the admission stage. (J.R. Goyal),J. VS Shekhawat/- Jr. P.A. D61