RUDRAMMA AND 3 ORS. Vs. K.C. SUKUNDRAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter coming up for orders on application made for vacating stay has been taken up for final disposal and after hearing the Counsel on both sides is disposed of by the following order.

(2.) This is a revision petition of the year 1985. Unfortunately in this case even before the petition was admitted interim stay was granted. In the result the revision petitioner has taken advantage of that situation. The matter has been proceeding from year to year without any progress and only in the year 1986-87 the records were called for. It was admitted actually 6 months after it was presented on 23-9-1985.

(3.) The facts leading to this revision petition may be stated briefly and they are as follows: Respondent presented a petition to the Court of the Civil Judge, Chikkamagalur seeking possession of 1 acre 24 guntas of land which was in the possession of respondent Nos. 1 to 4 who are the petitioners in this Court inter alia on the ground that he was the successful auction purchaser at the Court auction held on 18-8-19791 the sale came to be confirmed by the Court and the sale certificate issued on 22nd Sept., 1979 for a consideration of Rs. 32,000.00. Sale Certificate is dated 24th of July 1980; the petitioner in the lower Court had obtained possession of 5 acres and 6 guntas of land but had not secured possession of the remaining extent out of what he had purchased. Therefore, he moved the Court for putting him in possession of the remainder of the schedule property which he had purchased in the court auction. It was resisted by the revision petitioners who were respondents in the Trial Court inter alia on the grounds that the petitioner had failed to discharge certain obligations which he had undertaken in the compromise decree passed in O.S.No. 47/71 and therefore he could not be permitted to take possession of the property of the respondent-revision petitioners; the sale itself had not taken place in Court and in accordance with law and therefore the auction purchaser acquired no title; what was sold at the Court auction was 6 acres and odd of land and that did not include the dwelling house and the drying yard and the cattle shed on the land and therefore 1 acre 24 guntas of land, the possession of which was sought was not liable to be handed over to the auction purchaser.