JUDGMENT : STANLEY, J. 1. There is in our opinion no force in this appeal. The judgment of our brother BLAIR appears to us to be unassailable. It has been argued by the learned Vakil for the appellant that hardship will be imposed upon his client if it be held that the purchase made by him was not a valid and binding purchase. The statue which empowers a Criminal Court to sell is properly clear and explicit in its terms. It provides that the proclamation shall be published and the mode in which the proclamation is to be published is given in section 87. 2. Further than that the section provides that a statement in writing by the Court issuing the proclamation to the effect that the proclamation was duly published or a specified day shall be conclusive evidence that the requirements of this section have been complied with, and that the proclamation was published on such day. Now, if the purchaser had taken the Ordinary precaution of ascertaining whether the Court had issued a state-ment in writing to the effect that the proclamation was duly published, he would not have been involved in this litigation, There has been carelessness on his part undoubtedly and he must take the consequence of it. It appears to us that the sale purported to be carried out by the Criminal Court was in this instance a nullity and passed no estate whatever to him. 3. We therefore dismiss the appeal with costs.