VASUDEVAN PILLAI Vs. RAMESH NAIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in E A. No. 60 of 1977 in O.S. No. 169 of 1955 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Alleppy is the appellant.

(2.) The above E.A. was filed under O.21 R.99 and 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for redelivery of the petition schedule property. Petitioner was dispossessed of the petition schedule property by delivery in execution of a decree in O.S. No. 169/55. According to the petitioner, he purchased the petition schedule property with an extent of 41 cents under Ext. A1 sale deed dated 23-10-1967 from M/s. G.L Kilikar, Cochin, a partnership firm. M/s. G.L. Kilikar, Cochin purchased, the property in court auction in execution of the decree obtained by them in O.S. No. 570 of 1954 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Vaikom against the 3rd respondent herein. Pursuant to the court auction, in O. S. No. 570 of 1954, M/s. G. L. Kilikar took delivery of the property through court on 3-8-1956 and they were in possession and enjoyment of the same. Thereafter, the petitioner purchased the property from M/s. G. L. Kilikar under Ext. A1. Since the petitioner was employed under the Central Government, he entrusted the management of the property with Naduvathul Islam Society, a registered Cooperative Society and the said Society was taking usufructs on his behalf. While so, the 1st respondent herein purchased the property in an auction sale in execution of the decree in O. S. No. 169 of 1955 obtained by the 2nd respondent.

(3.) In the objection filed by the Ist respondent, he contended that neither the petitioner nor his predecessor M/s. G. L. Kilikar had right in the property, that it was after O. S. No. 169 of 1955 was filed, the attachment and sale proceedings in O. S. No. 570 of 1954 of the Munsiff's Court, Vaikom took place and that the above proceedings do not affect the sale and delivery in execution of the charged decree in O. S. No. 169 of 1955 as those proceedings were hit by principle of lis pendens.