KRISHNAN Vs. VALLIAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil revision petition has been filed against the fair and decretal order dated 20.7.1998 made in E.A.No.32 of 1998 in E.P.No.79 of 1996 in O.S.No.346 of 1990 on the file of the Court of Principal District Munsif, Sivagangai.

(2.) IN fact, the application in E.A.No.32 of 1998 was filed by the petitioner herein, under Sec.47 of the Code of Civil Procedure on averments that though he got impleaded as the second defendant to the suit in O.S.No.346 of 1990 filed by the respondent herein, he did not at all know about his impleadment and whatever that oc- curred in the suit: that one Meyyammal Aachi filed the suit in O.S.No.l 14 of 1971 against the respondent herein before the Court of District Munsif, Sivagangai and the said suit having been decreed, an application in E.P.No.291 of 1974 had been filed and the properties have been sold in court auction on 27.1.1976 and the successful bidder in this Court auction was one Kodhaiyammal for Rs.2,250 and thereafter as per the order passed in E.A.No.98 of 1976, dated 12.6.1976, delivery of possession of the said property had also been effected as a result of which, the said Kodhaiyammal became the absolute owner of the suit properties.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the second aspect of the case is that it is by the original owner Valliyammal's mortgage by purchase in Court auction, Kodhaiyammal became the owner by virtue of the sale proceeding by the court: that the right, title and interest of Valliyamrnal since allegedly been sold in court auction in 1976, thereafter, she had no right at all in the property; that Kodhaiyammal became the owner of the mortgagee's right and the mortgagor's right since Kodhaiyammal, who already had the right in the mortgage purchased the right of Vallaiyammal also by right of redemption in the court auction and hence Kodhaiyammal can file a suit for recovery of the mortgage amount; that after the sale in 1976, whatever rights that Valliyammal had, were lost by court auction: that if at all, it is the auction purchaser in the Court auction in 1976, who alone would be entitled to file a suit for redemption since Valliyammal's right got extinguished; that these aspects were neither pleaded nor brought to the notice of the court: