HUSAINSAB GOUSUSAB KAREEMSAB ELLAPUR Vs. KRISHNARAO SHESHAGIRIRAO SARATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is filed challenging the order of the learned judge in execution petition on the file of the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Hirekerur

(2.) IN brief the facts that lead to the filing of the revision petition are as under: one Husainsab Goususab Ellapur filed a suit for specific performance of agreement of sale in respect of land bearing Sy. No. 194 measuring 11 acres 15 guntas situate at Chikkounte Village of Hirekerur Taluk against Krishnarao Sheshagirirao Sarathi. It was decreed on 24-9-1973 directing the said Krishnarao to execute the registered sale deed after receiving the balance of consideration. Subsequent to the said decree karnataka Land Reforms Act came into force. The land in question was enanted land, therefore, the Tahsildar, Hirekerur, passed an order vesting the land with the Government. The entries in the record of rights also came to be changed accordingly in the name of the Government. By that time the revision petitioner Husainsab Goususab died. The L. Rs of said Husainsab Goususab filed Form No. 7 seeking occupancy rights. The decree-holder informed the Land Tribunal that they are the purchasers of the land in question. The matter went up to the High Court and was remanded back to the Tribunal for fresh enquiry. The Land tribunal, Hirekerur, on 15-4-1989 held that the present revision petitioners/decree-holders are not the tenants of the land in question and they are the only purehasers of the land. Therefore, occupancy rights were not conferred on them. Subsequently, the revision petitioners/decree-holders filed the present execution petition after tracing the L. Rs of the deceased defendant/judgment-debtor. They also noticed that the names of the respondents herein were entered in the records of the suit land. On 23-10-1996 a notice was issued to the respondents herein calling upon them to execute a sale deed as per the decree in O. S. No. 84 of 1972 after receiving the balance of consideration of Rs. 1,000/ -. According to the revision petitioners when the respondents failed to execute the sale deed the cause of action for filing the execution petition arose, filed the execution petition before the Court seeking a direction for the execution of a conveyance document. It is further contended on their behalf that by virtue of coming into force of the Land Reforms Act on 1-3-1974 they did not execute the decree in O. S. No. 84 of 1972 and they were making efforts to delete the name of the Government appearing in the land records. The date on which the judgment-debtors/respondents denied to execute the registered sale deed the right has accrued to the decree-holder to execute the decree i. e. , with effect from 23-10-1996. Therefore, the present revision petition is filed within twelve years from 23-10-1996 and is not barred by time.

(3.) WHEN the execution petition came to be registered, the office raised objection that the date of decree is dated 24-9-1973 and the execution filed in 1999 is barred by limitation and it is filed beyond twelve years from that date. The decree-holders were heard by the Court and the point that came up for consideration was whether the execution petition was barred by limitation. The only contention of the decree-holder was that from the date of denial to execute the sale deed by judgment-debtors the cause of action arose to execute the decree. It was also contended that the time taken for proceedings before the Land Tribunal, Hirekerur has to be excluded. But the learned Judge relying on Article 136 of the limitation Act held that the application under Order 21, Rule 11 of the cpc was hopelessly barred by time and the application filed under section 148 of the CPC seeking enlargement of time to deposit balance of consideration of Rs. 1,000/- do not survive for consideration. Aggrieved by the said order the present revision petition is filed.