CEMENT DISTRIBUTORS LTD Vs. KOMAL TRADERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a misconceived revision petition by the plaintiff. He is aggrieved by the order made by the Court of the 15th Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore, in Os.No.140/1972 since decreed and pending in appeal in this Court in RFA No. 139/1980. This Court in the Regular First Appeal directed stay of execution of the decree subject to certain conditions. They were three : The first condition was that a sum of Rs. 6000/- and odd was to be paid towards cost. The second condition was that a further sum of Rs. 20,000/- must be deposited by the. defendants -appellants. The third condition was that for the balance of the amount decreed security should be furnished to the satisfaction of the trail Court. In that circumstance, the trial Court accepted the security offered by one H.M. Mallanna who offered security personally as well as the property mentioned in the schedule to the security bond executed supported by the sale deed in his favour. The security bond as well as the sale deed was lying in the custody of the Court at which point of time he applied for return of the sale deed having regard to the fact that he needed the same for purpose of changing the katha from the Bangalore Development Authority in his own favour. The lease-cum-sale came to an end and the sale deed was to be registered. The trial Court has permitted the same by returning the sale deed. Therefore, the present revision petition by the plaintiff.

(2.) Once the security bond is executed in favour of the Court, it means, a charge is created on the property in favour of the Court. The person who stood surety may create further charge on the property is without any foundation in law. Even if he does Court's power to bring the property to sale, realise the amount, and pay it to the plaintiff in the event it becomes necessary does not cease.

(3.) The petition is therefore misconceived and it is dismissed.