JUDGMENT King, J. 1. The main question involved in this appeal is whether an order of the District Munsif of Tenali, dated the 31st December, 1938 confirming a sale held in execution is void or not. The respondents who are the legal representatives of the judgment-debtor stated that the order was void because it was passed after the death of their father and without their having been impleaded in the execution petition. On the other hand, the decree-holder who appeals argues that the provisions of Order 22, Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with the provisions of Order 21, Rule 92 justify the order confirming the sale even though the respondents father was dead at the time it was passed. It seems to me that this contention of the appellant is bound to prevail.