Limitation for deposit to set aside a sale is governed by Article 127, not a separate 30-day bar under CPC Rule 92(2).

Order XXI Rule 92(2) CPC does not itself prescribe a separate limitation period for the deposit required to set aside a sale of immovable property. Article 127 of the Limitation Act, 1963 governs the time for filing the application to set aside the sale, and the statutory scheme was read as allowing the deposit to be made within that 60-day period. Rule 92(2) operates only to remove the court's discretion where the application and deposit are made within 30 days. The earlier view in P.K. Unni was not accepted, and a deposit made within 60 days with the Article 127 application is maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the period for making the deposit in an application to set aside a sale of immovable property under Order XXI Rule 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure is 30 days from the date of sale under Order XXI Rule 92(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, or 60 days from the date of sale under Article 127 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

Analysis: The provisions were held to operate in different fields only to the extent that Article 127 of the Limitation Act, 1963 prescribes the time for making the application to set aside the sale, while Order XXI Rule 92(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure merely removes the Court's discretion where the application is made and the required deposit is made within 30 days. The statutory scheme and the amendment to Article 127 were read as intended to extend the effective time available for the depositor, and no warrant was found for treating Order XXI Rule 92(2) as independently prescribing a shorter limitation period for deposit. The earlier view in P.K. Unni was not accepted.

Conclusion: Order XXI Rule 92(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure does not prescribe a limitation period for making the deposit, and a deposit made within 60 days along with the application under Article 127 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is maintainable.

---