CLAKSHMIAH SETTY Vs. GURUSWAMY ARADHYA AND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In a suit brought under Rule 63 of Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure, by the decree-holder for the establishment of the title of his judgment-debtor, the judgment-debtor during the pendency of the suit very unwisely paid the decree-holder and satisfied his debt, and, after having done so, he asked the Court to transpose him as a co-plaintiff so that he might continue the suit which the decree-holder could no longer continue. This transposition having been permitted by the Court below, the successful claimant against whom the suit was instituted questions the correctness of the order of transportation.

(2.) After the decree was made against the defendant 1 in a suit brought by the plaintiff in the suit out of which this revision petition arises, he got certain properties attached on November 4, 1957, stating that those properties belonged to defendant 1. Defendant 2 presented a claim under Rule 58 of Order XXI of the code of Civil Procedure on June 7, 1958, and his allegation was that the property had been sold to him by defendant 1 and his father, as long ago as on May 8, 1935. On september 30, 1961, that claim was allowed.

(3.) On November 23, 1961, the plaintiff brought his suit under Rule 63 of Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure. Defendant 1 in that suit was the judgment-debtor and defendant 2 was the successful claimant.