https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470202 Estoppel prevented an auction purchaser from asserting title acquired at a court sale after knowingly attesting a later conveyance stating that the judgment-debtor owned the land. By allowing the judgment-debtor to remain in possession and acquiescing in the conveyance, the purchaser represented that no adverse title would be claimed, and the transferee could rely on that representation. Section 317 of the Civil Procedure Code barred a suit based on an allegation that the certified auction purchaser was a benamidar, but did not preclude estoppel where title and possession were sustainable without proving benami. Procuring a sale certificate later was treated as fraudulent under the statutory saving. en-us Fri, 26 Jul 1912 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Jul 2026 16:41:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470202 Estoppel prevented an auction purchaser from asserting title acquired at a court sale after knowingly attesting a later conveyance stating that the judgment-debtor owned the land. By allowing the judgment-debtor to remain in possession and acquiescing in the conveyance, the purchaser represented that no adverse title would be claimed, and the transferee could rely on that representation. Section 317 of the Civil Procedure Code barred a suit based on an allegation that the certified auction purchaser was a benamidar, but did not preclude estoppel where title and possession were sustainable without proving benami. Procuring a sale certificate later was treated as fraudulent under the statutory saving. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 26 Jul 1912 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470202