J VENKAFESWARLU Vs. OFFICIAL RECEIVER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short question which falls for determination in this civil revision petit'on is whether the judgement-debtor is a parson, "whose interests are affected", within the meaning of Order 21, Rule 90 of the Code of Civil Procedure. This question arises in the following circumstances.

(2.) The petitioner has mortgaged his house property. The said propertywas attached in execution of the decree and was sold subject to mortgage. In the meanwhile, the petitioner filed an insolvency petition and oa 19-8-1980 an order was passed appointing Interim Receiver. Tne Receiver took possession on the same date. On 22-9-1980, i e., about a month later, the property was put to auction. On 21-10-1980 the interim Receiver tiled E.A. 701/80 under Order 21, Rule 90, C.P.C. to set aside tne sale. While the E.A. was pending, the insolvency petition I.P. I/SO was dismissed for default on 24-6-1982. Consequently, the court dismissed E-A. 701/80 on 18-11-1982. It appears, in the meanwhile the sale was confirmed on 2-3-1983. Later, the Judgment-debtor filed C.M.A, 15/83 against tne order dated 18-11-1982 dismissing E.A. 701/80. The learned District Judge, Krishna dismissed the appeal on the ground that the judgment-debtor has no locus standi to file the appeal. It is this order that is questioned in this revision petition.

(3.) Sri S. Venkateswara Rao, the learned counsel for the petitionersubmits that the appellate Judge erred in holding that the j udgment-debtor cannot maintain an appeal as he is not a person 'whose interests are affected by the sale' to maintain on application under Order 21, Rule 90, C.P.C. in view of the appointment of Interim Receiver under Section 20 of the Provincial Insolvency Act.