https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468990 An objection to set aside a sale under Order XXI, Rule 90 CPC could not be entertained unless the prescribed deposit or security was furnished within the period when the objection was validly filed. Because security was furnished after limitation expired, the court had no power to extend time and later compliance could not revive an invalid objection. The proviso was treated as barring entertainment of the objection altogether, unlike the earlier Patna view that only barred admission. The objection was therefore not maintainable and the revision failed. en-us Thu, 19 May 1960 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 May 2026 11:34:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468990 An objection to set aside a sale under Order XXI, Rule 90 CPC could not be entertained unless the prescribed deposit or security was furnished within the period when the objection was validly filed. Because security was furnished after limitation expired, the court had no power to extend time and later compliance could not revive an invalid objection. The proviso was treated as barring entertainment of the objection altogether, unlike the earlier Patna view that only barred admission. The objection was therefore not maintainable and the revision failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 19 May 1960 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468990