On motion of Ridgely for Mitchell, the purchaser, the Court granted a rule to show cause why the sale of certain lands made by the sheriff under a writ of venditioni exponas should not be set aside. The ground of the rule was that the sheriff had not fixed up in each hundred in the county written notices of the sal. 1 Del. Laws 111 (c. 46a, s. 4).
Clayton and Hall now showed, for cause, that the person making the application is the purchaser. The Act was passed to prevent lands from selling under their value, and the benefit of this plea is obviously on the very face of this Act intended to be given to the owner only. In this case Rosin, the former owner, is content with the sale. In fact, the land has sold very well, and did not Mitchell think so, the Court would not have been troubled with this application.
PER CURIAM.
The provisions of the Act are direct and positive. The sale was not advertised in the manner prescribed by law, and must be set aside no matter by whom the application is made.
Rule made absolute.