ERANNA Vs. SABJAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petition coming on for preliminary hearing, the petition is considered for final disposal, having regard to the fact that the Respondents are served and are un-represented and given the facts and circumstances of the case.

(2.) The facts briefly narrated are as follows:

(3.) The question therefore for consideration would be whether the Petitioner's application under Order XXI Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 1908 ought to have been considered, in the first instance when it was reported to the Executing Court that the Petitioner was in possession of the suit property, and when he was not the judgment debtor. The question is squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Brahmdeo Chaudhary v. Rishikesh Prasad Jaiswal and Anr., 1997 AIR(SC) 856. The Supreme Court in the above decision has lucidly laid down the law on the point, in the following manner: