PEDDA EDLA RAM KISHTIAH Vs. MANNE POCHIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only question involved in this C.M.S.A. before us is whether ollala Ambiah v. Avadhanula Mallanna, (1964) 1 Andh WR 319: (AIR 1964 Andh-Pra 514) requires re-consideration in so far as it affects attachments of properties in execution of decrees obtained against agriculturists governed by the provisions of the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act (XXI of 1950) (hereinafter called the Act).

(2.) It may be stated that the Munsif Magistrate, Kamareddy passed an order on 30-4-1959 directing the decree-holder to obtain and produce sanction of the Collector as required under Section 47 of the Act for the sale of lands under attachment. As this order was not complied with, the execution petition was struck off. In appeal, the District Judge, Nizamabad sustained that order firstly on the ground that once the decree-holder has submitted to the order, and approached the Collector, he cannot now turn round and say that the order of the Court below passed on 30th of April, 1959 was not correct, and secondly, that Act was passed not only for regulating the relations of land-holders and tenants of agricultural lands but also for preventing alienations of such lands. As such, the property was not liable to attachment and sale in execution of the decree under S. 60 C.P.C. without sanction under S. 47 of the Act.

(3.) Our learned brother Sharfuddin, J. referred the matter to a bench inasmuch as there was no procedure prescribed under the rules for obtaining sanction in respect of lands attached and to be sold belonging to a judgment-debtor who is an agriculturist.