RAMASWAMI NAICKER Vs. JAGADEESAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a civil revision, petition against the order of the learned District Munsif, Sattur, dismissing the petition filed by the civil revision petitioner praying for rateable distribute on of the proceeds of the sale of immovable properties effected in E.P. No 331 of 1974, in O.S. No. 485 of 1972. The civil revision petitioner filed O.S. No. 128 of 1972 on the file of the District Court, Ramanathapuram at Madurai, and obtained a decree against the defendant in the suit. The respondent herein filed O.S. No. 485 of 1972 on the file of the District Munsif's Court, Sattur, and obtained a decree against the same defendant. Both the decrees were for payment of monies. The civil revision petitioner filed an execution petition in the Sub -Court of Ramanathapuram at Madurai for attachment and sale of the immovable properties of the judgment -debtor. The respondent herein in execution of the decree obtained by him in the aforesaid O.S No. 485 of 1972 filed E.P. No. 331 of 1974 in the District Munsif 's Court, Sattur, for attachment and sale of the same in movable properties in pursuance of the decree against the same defendant. While the petition in the Sub -Court filed by the civil revision petitioner was pending, the properties were sold in Court auction in pursuance of the proceedings in execution in the Court of the District Munsif, Sattur, and the amount realised by the sale of the properties was deposited into Court. Thereupon, the civil revision petitioner ceased to pursue the execution proceedings in the Sub -Court. Instead, he applied to the District Munsif's Court, Sattur, for rateable distribution of the amount which was held in deposit to the credit of O.S. No. 485 of 1972. The learned District Munsif was of the view that because the execution petition in pursuance of the decree in the aforesaid O.S. No. 128 of 1972 was not pending in his Court, the petitioner is not en titled to rateable distribution. He, therefore, dismissed the petition. Aggrieved by this order of the learned District Munsif, the decree -holder in O.S. No. 128 of 1972 has preferred this civil revision petition.

(2.) THE matter in dispute is simple and is covered by authority. The Sub -Court of Ramanathapuram is a Court of higher grade than the District Munsif's Court, Sattur, and is in fact the Court which has appellate jurisdiction over the District Munsif's Court, Sattur. Section 63, Civil Procedure Code lays down that -

(3.) ON the other side, reliance is placed by the learned Counsel for the respondent on a decision by Kailasam, J., (as he then was) in, Veerappa Chettiar v. Palaniappa Chettiar : AIR 1973 Mad 313 . In that case, the question arose whether the respondent was entitled to rateable distribution, under Section 73, Civil Procedure Code. The learned Judge has observed that: