KURUVILA Vs. MICHAEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question involved in this Revision is whether the judgment debtor is entitled to contend that he has no absolute title over the property sought to be sold by the court in execution of the money decree passed against him, and therefore, the property is not liable to be sold in execution of the decree.

(2.) The first Respondent obtained a money decree against the revision Petitioner and the second Respondent. The decree passed by the trial court is for the refund of the advance amount received by the judgment debtor on the basis of an agreement for sale of an item of immovable property. Therefore, there is a statutory charge on the property under Section 55(6)(b) of the Transfer of Property Act. The property was brought to sale in execution for the realisation of the decree amount. The property has an extent of 62 cents. The revision Petitioner/judgment debtor filed an objection contending that the decree is not executable by sale of the property in question as the property is a non-patta land belonging to the Government. It was contended that the decree holder has not produced particulars regarding the revenue assessed upon the property and also whether there is any encumbrance on the property. The decree holder also did not mention the nature and character of the property sought to be sold.

(3.) The decree holder contended that whatever right the judgment debtor has in the property is liable to be sold in execution of the decree. The judgment debtor is not entitled to object to the sale contending that he has no absolute title to the property.