Sunday, 19, May, 2024
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Nuthi Anjaiah Died Another vs Boyina Venkata Krishna Rao ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 7582 AP

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 7582 AP
Judgement Date : 10 October, 2022

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Nuthi Anjaiah Died Another vs Boyina Venkata Krishna Rao ... on 10 October, 2022
                                    1



     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE BANDARU SYAMSUNDER

         CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1338 OF 2015

ORDER:

This Civil Revision petition is filed by the petitioner under section

115 of Civil Procedure code (in short CPC) orders passed in EA No.109

of 2014 in E.A.No.42 of 2003 in E.P.41 of 1995 in O.S.No.73 of 1983

on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Parchur, Prakasam District

wherein and whereby the executing Court dismissed petition filed by

the Revision petitioner under order XXII rule 9 r/w 151 CPC though

there was no contest either on behalf of D.Hr or J.Dr who are

respondents herein.

2. The Revision petitioner who is 3rd party to the proceedings filed

petition before executing Court permit him to come on record, on the

ground that auction purchaser who purchased execution petition

schedule property sold petition schedule property to him and executed

registered sale deed dated 29-01-2004. He submits that auction

purchaser also executed the General Power of Attorney in his favour

and authorized him to represent in the execution proceedings and he

filed EA.05 of 2006 to permit him to represent the auction purchaser

which was allowed, and his vendor also filed petition for delivery of

E.P. schedule property wherein Court ordered delivery of the property 2

and in the meanwhile auction purchaser died. It is the contention of

Revision petitioner that in view of death of his attorney as he

purchased Execution petition schedule property under registered sale

deed 29.1.2004 and as legal heirs of auction purchaser are not

evincing any interest to implead themselves in the proceedings, he

prays to permit him to come on record.

3. Though either the Decree holder or Judgment debtor not filed

any counter before Executing court and they remained ex parte, court

below dismissed petition filed by the petitioner on the ground that

without adding legal heirs of deceased auction purchaser as

respondents, the petition is not maintainable.

4. Aggrieved by the orders passed by the executing Court, the

present Revision petition is filed by the petitioner on the ground that as

he purchased execution petition schedule property from auction

purchaser under Registered Sale deed dated 29.01.2014 by paying

valuable sale consideration due to that he is necessary party to be

impleaded in a petition filed by auction purchaser seeking delivery of

execution petition schedule property. He prays to allow the petition.

5. I have heard learned counsel for Revision petitioner. 3

6. The learned counsel Mr.Challa Siva Sankar, represented on

behalf of Mr.C.M.R Velu, learned counsel for R2/J.Dr. Learned counsel

for Revision petitioner mainly contended that as Revision petitioner

purchased execution petition schedule property due to that he is

necessary party to be impleaded in the execution proceedings and also

in the petition filed by the auction purchaser in view of order XXII Rule

9 CPC. He prays to allow the petition.

7. Now the issue that emerges for consideration of this Court is:-

"Whether the Order under challenge is sustainable and tenable and whether the same warrants any interference of this court under Section 115 of C.P.C?"

POINT:-

8. Before going to the merits of the case, it would be beneficial to

quote Section 2(11) of CPC, which reads as under:-

Legal Representative:-

Legal representative is a person in law who represents the estate of the deceased and includes any person who intermeddles with the estate of deceased and where a party sues or sued in representative character, the person on whom the estate devolves on the death of the party so suing or sued. S. 2(11) of CPC.

4

9. On perusal of the above definition of legal representatives which

also includes any person who intermeddles with the estate of deceased

also legal representative. There is no dispute with regard to purchase

of execution petition schedule property by the petitioner herein from

auction purchaser under registered sale deed dated 29.01.2004.

Before executing Court respondents herein who are D.Hr and J.Dr not

chosen to contest and remained ex parte. Though revision petitioner

has filed petition to implead legal representatives of deceased R1/D.Hr,

who are not necessary to be added in the present revision petition as

execution petition schedule property is already sold in the Court

auction purchased by vendor of petitioner herein and sale is also

confirmed and sale certificate also issued on 11.03.1997.

10. This Court in C.Obi Reddy....Appellant Vs K.Sanjeeva

Reddy....Respondent 2019(2) ALD 484 held that

"Legal representative as defined in Section 2(11) CPC means any person who represents the estate of the deceased and includes a person who intermeddles with the estate of the deceased".

11. In the present case, petitioner herein is said to be purchaser of

execution petition schedule property from auction purchaser who

admittedly died after filing of petition seeking for delivery as sale in his 5

favour also confirmed and sale certificate issued. The petitioner herein

stepped into the shoes of the auction purchaser thereby he is legal

representative as he is intermeddles with the estate of deceased which

is execution petition schedule property. The executing Court

erroneously dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner on the ground

that legal heirs of auction purchaser to be added as respondents which

is not necessary as property has been already said to be sold by the

auction purchaser to the revision petitioner herein. Therefore, orders

passed by executing Court are not sustainable either in law or on facts

which needs interference of this court under section 115 of CPC.

12. In the result, the Civil Revision petition is allowed. The petition

filed by the petitioner in E.A.No.109 of 2014 in E.A.No.42 of 2003 in

E.P.No.41 of 1995 in O.S.No.73 of 1983 is hereby allowed and the

petitioner is permitted to come on record as 2nd petitioner in the

petition filed by the auction purchaser before the executing Court. No

order as to costs

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending if any, shall stand

closed.

__________________________ JUSTICE BANDARU SYAMSUNDER Date :10.10.2022 Chb,Grl.

6

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE BANDARU SYAMSUNDER

C.R.P.No.1338 of 2015

Date : 10.10.2022

Chb,Grl.

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 
 
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2024

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2024', Apply Now!

 
 
 
 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

Publish Your Article

Campus Ambassador

Media Partner

Campus Buzz