RAJENDRA KUMAR Vs. K N V NATARAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The third party-auction purchaser is the revision petitioner.

(2.) The third respondent herein as plaintiff had filed a suit against respondents 1 & 2 herein, arraying them as defendants, for recovery of certain amounts due on a promissory note. The suit was decreed exparte on 3.1.1995. Thereafter, a petition was filed by respondents 1 & 2/the defendants in the suit, to set aside the exparte decree, which was dismissed, for non compliance of certain conditions. After the dismissal of the petition to set aside the exparte decree, the decree holder filed E.P.No.49/95, which was opposed by the judgment debtors, as if they have no saleable interest in the property. Overruling the objection, the Executing Court fixed the sale on 19.2.1996, since the conditional order in I.A.No. 243/1995, directing the respondents 1 & 2 to deposit the decree amount on or before 20.12.1995, was not complied with and the further fact being that there was no stay, property of the judgment debtors were brought for sale in E.P.NO.49/95.

(3.) In the Court auction, the revision petitioner/third party purchased the property, for a sum of Rs.2,00,100/- and he had also deposited a sum of Rs.50,025/- as per the procedure, within the stipulated time. The auction purchaser deposited the balance of Rs.1,50,075/- and also a sum of Rs.14,010/-, towards non judicial stamps for sale certificate.