THRESIA Vs. KOCHAKEAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE are unable to share the view taken by the courts below in regard to the construction of S. 7 of the Kerala Stay of Eviction proceedings Act 1967 (Act 9 of 1967) and we think that this appeal should be allowed.

(2.) THE decree-holder appellant obtained a decree in O. S. No. 849 of 1959, Munsiff's Court, Trichur, for arrears of rent against the respondents in respect of Sy. No. 755, 738 and 756/2 held by the judgment-debtors as tenants under the decree-holder. THEse three items were sold in execution of an earlier decree. THEreafter, the decree in O. S. No. 849 of 1959 was put in execution in respect of the three items referred to earlier, and a fourth item Sy. No. 754/4. Items 1 to 3 were deleted in view of their sale in execution of the decree for prior arrears, and the sale proceeded only in respect of Sy. No. 754/4. This was sold and purchased by the decree-holder. THE item was held by the judgment-debtors as tenants, not under the appellant, but under a different person. Judgment-debtors applied for cancellation of the sale under S. 7 of Act 9 of 1967. That application was allowed by the execution court and the judgment was confirmed on appeal by the appellate court.