R VENKATESH Vs. KALLIAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful first defendant is the appellant. The predecessors in title of the respondents 1 to 6 herein namely, Kalliammal and Balasubramaniam filed the suit O. S. No. 413 of 2004 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore, for declaration that the sale conducted by the Official Receiver in respect of the suit property in IP No. 7 of 87 is null and void and not binding on the plaintiffs and for permanent injunction.

(2.) The case of the plaintiffs was that the suit property having a total extent of 849 sq. ft of land and building, belonged to a partnership firm known as 'Parameshwari Hall' represented by its partners O. Jayaraman, J. Venkatraman and J. Kumarvavelu. The said partnership firm sold the northern side block of the suit property to one P. Balaji under Ex. A3, dated 12.09.1986 and southern side block consisting of 363 sq. ft to one P. Gopal under Ex. A5 on the same date. By reason of the sales in favour of Gopal and Balaji, certain acts of insolvency alleged to have been committed by the partnership firm, the creditors of the partnership firm filed I. P. No. 7 of 1987 to adjudge the partnership firm and its partners as 'insolvent'. In that petition, Gopal and Balaji were also impleaded as respondents and they did not prosecute the case and by order, dated 15.04.1994, the partnership firm and its partners were adjudged 'insolvent' in I. P. No. 7 of 1987. Meanwhile, the said Balaji, who purchased the property under Ex. A3 sold the said extent under Ex. A2 to one Krishnamoorthy and from Krishnamoorthy, Ramakrishnan, the husband of the first plaintiff Kaliammal purchased that property under Ex. A1, dated 04.03.1993. Similarly, from Gopal, the first plaintiff purchased the southern side block consisting of 363 sq. ft. of land and building under Ex. A4, dated 4.3.1993. Therefore, Ramakrishnan and Kalliammal became the absolute owners of the entire extent of 849 sq. ft. and they are husband and wife and after the death of Ramakrishnan, the properties were enjoyed by Kalliammal and Balasubramanim as owners.

(3.) It is the case of the plaintiffs that they are the bona fide purchasers for value and they are not aware of the pendency of I. P proceedings and they purchased the property on 04.03.1993 before the date of adjudication of their vendors as 'insolvents' and therefore, their sale cannot be impeached. It is their further case that the Official Receiver filed I. A. No. 473 of 2002 under sections 53 and 54 of the Provincial Insolvency Act to annual the sale deeds, dated 12.09.1986, Exs. A3 and A5 in favour of Gopal and Balaji. In that application also, Gopal and Balaji were made as parties and the plaintiffs, who were the subsequent purchasers were not made as parties and the sales were annulled in I. A. No. 473 of 2002 and therefore, the Official Receiver sold the property in public auction and the same was purchased by the appellant herein and therefore, the suit was filed for declaration that auction sale by the Official Receiver in favour of the appellant herein in I. P. No. 7 of 1983 was null and void and not binding on the plaintiffs.