CHERIYAN Vs. ACHEYAMMA MATHEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The decree holder in O. S. No. 12 of 1115 of the District Court of Alleppey is the petitioner in this revision petition. He filed a petition for the execution of his decree before the District Court of Mavelikara, after transfer to that court, on 4-8-1124. That petition was dismissed on 18-2-1125 by an order which we are not prepared to consider as a ministerial or administrative order passed for statistical purposes.

(2.) The respondent in this revision petition and the decree holder in O.S. No. 176 of 1116 of the District Court of Mavelikara is one and the same person. In execution of the decree in O.S. No. 176 of 1116 - against the same judgment - debtor - the respondent brought certain properties to sale on 26-10-1125, purchased the properties himself, and deposited the sale proceeds in court in view of the petitioners claim for rateable distribution.

(3.) The petitioners claim for rateable distribution was rejected by the Additional District Judge of Mavelikara by an order dated 3-8-1959, and it is the correctness of that order that is challenged in this revision petition. There is no doubt that the petitioner filed his execution petition in O.S. No. 12 of 1115 prior to the receipt of the assets in court in pursuance of the execution of the decree in O.S. No. 176 of 1116. It is equally clear that the petitioners execution petition was not pending on the date of the receipt of the assets in court. The sole question for determination is whether the non pendency of the execution petition on the date of the receipt of the assets in court will disentitle him to rateable distribution.