Execution sale confirmation and sale certificate issuance: ministerial order upheld, limitation barred a belated challenge to title.

Once an execution sale is validly confirmed, title relates back to the date of sale, and the later issue of the sale certificate is a ministerial act that the executing court can validly order. The sale certificate granted in favour of the auction purchaser was therefore not void or without jurisdiction, and the purchaser's title could not be denied on that basis. A later suit seeking declaration, possession and injunction could not proceed on the footing that the sale was void, because any challenge had to be brought within limitation against the sale-certificate order. The suit was accordingly treated as time-barred.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the executing court's order issuing the sale certificate in favour of the Mahila Vidyalaya was void or without jurisdiction; (ii) whether the suit for declaration, possession and injunction filed after the execution sale was barred by limitation and could proceed on the footing that the sale was void.

Issue (i): Whether the executing court's order issuing the sale certificate in favour of the Mahila Vidyalaya was void or without jurisdiction.

Analysis: The sale in execution had been validly confirmed in favour of the auction purchaser under Order XXI Rule 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and the title of the auction purchaser related back to the date of sale under Section 65 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The application made by the Mahila Vidyalaya for issue of the sale certificate was entertained by the executing court, which ordered that the certificate issue in its name. The issuance of a sale certificate is a ministerial step following confirmation of sale, and the executing court had jurisdiction to pass the order. The record also showed that the parties had long accepted the sale certificate and had not challenged the order in time.

Conclusion: The sale certificate order was not void or without jurisdiction, and no title could be denied to the Mahila Vidyalaya on that ground.

Issue (ii): Whether the suit for declaration, possession and injunction filed after the execution sale was barred by limitation and could proceed on the footing that the sale was void.

Analysis: The earlier steps taken to set aside the sale and to question the execution proceedings had failed, and the later suit was filed many years after the sale certificate order. Since the underlying auction sale had been validly confirmed, the plaintiff could not treat the transaction as a void sale that could simply be ignored. The challenge, if any, was required to be brought within limitation against the order granting the sale certificate. On the facts, the suit was hopelessly beyond time, and the respondents could not claim possession on the basis that the appellant was a trespasser.

Conclusion: The suit was barred by limitation and the plea that the sale was void was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The High Court's decree was set aside and the suit was dismissed, the appellant being held entitled to the benefit of the valid execution sale and sale certificate.

Ratio Decidendi: Once a court confirms an execution sale, title relates back to the date of sale, and the subsequent issuance of the sale certificate is a ministerial act that cannot be treated as void for want of jurisdiction where the executing court was competent to pass the order; such an order must be challenged within limitation.

---