KARUPPIAH AMBALAM Vs. AYYA NADAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil revision petition raises a question of law regarding the scope of S. 24 c. P. C. in its application to proceedings in execution.

(2.) A decree was passed in O. S. 1 of 1962 by the Sub Court, Dindigul in the madurai Dt. The execution proceedings were initiated in that court, and since the property to be proceeded against was situated within the jurisdiction of the Sub court, Savaging, in the Ramanathapuram Dt. , the decree was transferred to the sub Court, Sivaganga, in following the procedure indicated in S. 39 C. P. C. , read with O. XXI Rules 5 and 8 C. P. C. Thereafter some allegations were made about the propriety of the execution being continued in the Sub Court, Sivaganga, because of the manner in which adjournments were being granted by the Subordinate judge, while dealing with the execution petition. The decree-holder filed a petition before the District Judge, Ramanathapuram, under S. 24 C. P. C. for transfer and after hearing both the parties, the learned District Judge transferred the execution petition to the Sub Court, Ramanathapuram at Madurai, for further execution and disposal. It is not in dispute that the property sought to be proceeded against is situated within the jurisdiction of the Sub Court, Sivaganga, and no part of it is situated within the jurisdiction of the Sub Court, Ramanathapuram.

(3.) AGAINST this decision this civil revision petition is filed by the judgment-debtorrespondent in the Court below, Sri. P. Balasubramaniam, learned counsel appearing for the petition therein, urged that under S. 24 C. P. C. , the District Court had no jurisdiction to transfer to another Court execution proceedings pending in one Subordinate Court after transfer to it under S. 39 C. P. C. Secondly, it was urged that even if under S. 24 it had power to transfer execution proceedings, the transfer would be made only to a Court which had jurisdiction over the property or the person against whom execution was sought.