Order XXI Rule 58 objections remain maintainable before sale confirmation where the objector asserts a prior enforceable interest in property.

An objection under Order XXI Rule 58 CPC was held maintainable after a court auction but before confirmation of sale, because "sold" in the proviso means a completed sale, not merely an auction. The Court held that until confirmation under Order XXI Rule 92, the auction-purchaser's rights remain incomplete and the executing court may still adjudicate the claim. It further held that Section 65 CPC does not override prior contractual rights affecting the property. An agreement-holder with a pre-existing interest was therefore not a stranger and had locus standi to resist execution sale. The executing court was required to decide the objections on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether an objection under Order XXI Rule 58 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was maintainable after the court auction had taken place but before confirmation of sale, and whether an agreement-holder with a prior claim over the property had locus standi to resist the execution sale.

Analysis: The proviso to Order XXI Rule 58(1) bars a claim only where the property has already been sold, and the expression "sold" was construed in the context of the scheme of execution law to mean a completed sale, not merely the holding of an auction. The Court preferred the view that, until confirmation under Order XXI Rule 92, the auction-purchaser's rights remain incomplete and the executing court can still adjudicate the claim. It further held that Section 65 of the Code, which relates title back to the date of sale after the sale becomes absolute, does not eliminate prior contractual obligations affecting the property. Since the appellant had a prior agreement of sale and therefore a pre-existing interest in the property, he was not a stranger to the proceedings and had sufficient locus to raise the objection.

Conclusion: The objection application was maintainable, the courts below were wrong in treating it as untenable, and the executing court was required to decide the appellant's objections on merits.

Ratio Decidendi: An objection to attachment under Order XXI Rule 58 cannot be rejected merely because a court auction has occurred, where the sale has not yet been confirmed and the objector asserts a prior enforceable interest in the property.

---