KUPPAMMAL Vs. CHINNATHAMBI PADAYACHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS against the concurrent findings by the courts below the first defendant in the Execution Application has filed the present appeal.

(2.) THE first respondent herein who is a third party to the Execution Proceedings has filed the E.A.No.1398 of 1984 in O.S.No: 856 of 1972 contending that he purchased the 0.34 cents namely the 6th item in the decree on consideration from Selvaraj, thangavelu and Chinnapattu. According to him the vendors filed O.S.No:649 of 1972 before the trial court and the same was decreed on 30.11.1973. In pursuance of that decree in E.P.No.210 of 1980 the trial court executed a registered sale deed in favour of the said Selvaraj and Thangaraju on 27.4.1981. THErefore the first respondent being a purchaser from them is a bona fide purchaser. After such purchase, the petitioner dug out two wells and made improvements for doing vegetation. THE first respondent also alleged that the respondents viz., Kuppammal and others who are the plaintiffs/decree holders have obtained a false and collusive decree and taken delivery on 31.8.1984. At that time the petitioner was away at Madras, but the delivery is not yet recorded. THErefore he is entitled for re-delivery. THE decree holders are quite aware of the first respondent's purchase.

(3.) THE learned Trial Judge taking into consideration of the pleadings and the evidence both oral and documentary and on hearing the learned counsels appeared on either side, allowed the Execution Application No.1393/84. Against which the decree holders preferred an appeal in CMA.No:14 of 1994 and the learned Appellate Judge also after considering the submissions of the counsels, dismissed appeal confirming the order passed by the learned Trial Judge. Aggrieved of the same, the present CMSA has been preferred before this court by the first plaintiff/decree holder.