S. PARAMANAYAGAM ASARI Vs. R.S. NAIDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil proceeding involves a question, which is of some interest on the particular facts of the case. S.C. No. 1625 of 1964 was admittedly a suit for recovery of arrears of rent, filed against the tenant who was impleaded as defendant with the name S. Periayanayagam Asari. The suit was decreed, and the record shows that the decree, as it ultimately stood, exhibited the name of the judgment -debtor as 'S. Periayanayagam Asari alias Paramanayagam Asari, son of Somasundaram Asari.'

(2.) THE decree -holder (respondent) filed an application under Order 21, rules 43 and 66, Civil Procedure Code, for attachment and sale of movables of his judgment -debtor. At that stage, the person who is the judgment -debtor according to the decree -holder entered appearance in response to notice and claimed that he was a third party and not the judgment -debtor. This person appears to have made a. stout denial in Court in respect of his identity as the judgment -debtor, and also to have claimed that there should be no attachment and sale of the movables, as they really belonged to him as a third party, not as the judgment -debtor. As learned Additional District Munsif himself observes, it therefore became necessary to clear doubts about the identity of the judgment -debtor, which was "a very unusual position."

(3.) THE revision is on the very simple ground that, according to the revision petitioner, the Court erred in holding that he was the defendant -judgment -debtor; hence there should be no further procedure against him.