MUTHUSAMY Vs. MANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above civil revision petition is filed under Sec.115 of the Civil Procedure Code against the order dated 16.8.1996 made in an application filed in R.E.A.No.1023 of 1993 under O.21, Rule 95 and Sec.151 of C.P.C. for delivery of possession of the immovable property as per the sale certificate issued by the Court.

(2.) THE revision petitioner is a Court auction purchaser who purchased the property on 2.11.1983 in the Court auction for a sum of Rs.25,800 and according to the petitioner, 1/4th of the amount was paid on the very same day and as per the sale notification, the balance amount was paid on 16.11.1983. THE judgment-debtor filed an application under Sec.47 of C.P.C. in R.E.A. No.867 of 1983 to set aside the sale, which application came to be allowed by the trial Court on 21.11.1984. THE said order was carried on in revision to this Court by the decree holder in C.R.P. No.159 of 1995 and ultimately this Court allowed the revision thereby set aside the order dated 21.11.1984 made in R.E.A. No.867 of 1983 by order dated 20.12.1989. In the light of the order passed on 20.12.1989 in the revision in C.R.P. No.159 of 1985, the auction sale in favour of the petitioner was confirmed on 21.9.1989. On 4.10.1989, the sale certificate was issued. It is pertinent to note here that on 2.7.1990, the judgment-debtor died. THE legal representatives of the judgment-debtor filed an application in R.E.A. No.175 of 1992 under Sec.47 of C.P.C. to set aside the sale. THE said application came to be dismissed on 23.12.1992. THE auction purchaser filed an application in R.E.A. No.1023 on 17.12.1993 for delivery of possession. Among other grounds, the petition was defended by the respondents herein i.e., the legal representatives of the judgment-debtor that it is barred by limitation and the executing Court by its order dated 16.8.1996 in a laconic order dismissed the application as not maintainable since it is filed one year after the sale confirmation. THE said order is now put in issue in the present revision petition.

(3.) THE relevant Article in respect of the present case is Art.134 of the Limitation Act, which reads as follows: