Bringing to notice, the underlying intent of execution proceedings, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Bhikchand S/O Dhondiram Mutha (Deceased) Through Lrs. v. Shamabai Dhanraj Gugale (Deceased) Through Lrs. was careful to strike the appropriate balance between justice to the decree holder and avoidable injustice to the judgment debtor, while also emphasizing the executing court’s obligations with respect to exercising the power to auction any property or part thereof.

The Supreme Court held that during the execution proceedings if the attachment of the judgment debtor’s property takes place, then the executing courts shouldn’t order the sale of the whole property when sale of the part property could have satisfied the decree.

The factual scenario before the court was that the entire property of the judgment debtor was attached by the executing court. Subsequently, in an auction sale to enforce the decree, the decree-holder themselves purchased the suit property.

Capturing the essence of a proceeding of execution of a decree of sale and reconciling the same with the rights of each party, the court observed as under:

“The execution of a decree by sale of the entire immovable property of the judgment debtor is not to penalise him but the same is provided to grant relief to the decree holder and to confer him the fruits of litigation. However, the right of a decree holder should never be construed to have bestowed upon him a bonanza only because he had obtained a decree for realisation of a certain amount. A decree for realisation of a sum in favour of the plaintiff should not amount to exploitation of the judgment debtor by selling his entire property.”

The court observed that in the case at hand, the executing court did not discharge its duty to ascertain whether the sale of a part of the attached property would be sufficient to satisfy the decree, and a failure to do so has caused great injustice to the judgment debtor and undue benefit to the auction purchaser.

Also, the court emphasized the point that if under such an attachment a sale took place in an auction, whereby the whole property of the judgment debtor is purchased by the decree-holder, without examining the fact that the part sale of the judgment debtor’s property could satisfy the decree, then such a sale would be termed as illegal.