The date but not the hour had been fixed - it is incumbent upon the court to specify both the day and the hour under Order 21, Rule 69 C. P. C." - non-mention of the hour for sale did amount to a material irregularity.

Shila Pal v. Comilla Banking Corporation,

 AIR 1945 Cal 434, 

relating to a case in which the date but not the hour had been fixed, his Lordship B. K. Mukherjea took the view.

"This is a material irregularity, for it is incumbent upon the court to specify both the day and the hour under Order 21, Rule 69 C. P. C."

That was a case in which no other bidder except the decree-holder was present at the time of the sale. Hence I hold that non-mention of the hour for sale did amount to a material irregularity.