Ajaib Singh and Others vs Rattan Kumar

Jaswant Singh, J.—CM 7558-CII/2014 under Order 22 Rule 3 read with Section 151 CPC has been moved by the applicants, who are sons of Judgment Debtor-Karnail Singh for permission to be impleaded as his legal heirs as also for permission to file the present revision.

It is stated that Karnail Singh has died on 24.4.2011 leaving behind no other legal heirs except the four sons named in para 1 of the application. The same is supported by the affidavit of Ajaib Singh, one of the sons.

For the reasons stated in the application supported by the affidavit the same is allowed subject to all just exceptions and the four sons detailed in para 1 are permitted to be brought on record as legal representatives of deceased Karnail Singh-Judgment Debtor and maintain the present revision petition.

Main Case.

Legal representatives of Karnail Singh are in revision aggrieved against the order dated 3.12.2013 whereby the application of Karnail Singh-Judgment Debtor u/s 47 read with Section 151 CPC for setting aside and cancellation of a sale effected on 16.7.2007, order of confirmation of sale on 27.11.2007 and sale certificate dated 14.12.2007 of the land mentioned in the heading of the application, has been dismissed.

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners, it is apparent that the present revision is totally devoid of any merits.

It is not disputed that the respondent-Decree Holder Rattan Kumar had filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 1,54,000/- alongwith interest on the basis of a pronote and receipt dated 10.5.2004. The said suit was decreed on 21.1.2006. The said decree concededly attained finality. Decree Holder filed execution proceedings on 21.2.2006 and the land measuring 72K12M of the Judgment Debtor-Karnail Singh was attached way back in the year 2006. Subsequently, the attached property was put to sale on 19.1.2007. Since after due notice and munadi no bidder had come forward, Decree Holder vide order dated 21.4.2007 was granted permission to bid by the learned Executing Court. The Decree Holder purchased the attached property for an amount of Rs. 1,77,258/- in the auction which was subsequently confirmed and a sale certificate issued on 27.11.2007. At no stage the Judgment Debtor came forward to pay the decretal amount and subsequently much after the issuance of sale certificate, application (P-4) was filed on 6.6.2009. It is conceded that the Judgment Debtor did not file his objections/application under Order 21 Rule 89 CPC within 60 days from the date of sale alongwith 5% of the sale amount and therefore, in the opinion of this Court, the learned Executing Court has rightly dismissed the said application and proceeded to execute the warrants of possession since the Judgment Debtor had permitted the proceedings to reach upto the final stage of issuance of sale certificate.

In the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court finds no ground to interfere in the impugned order.

Dismissed.