CB LAXMINARAYANA Vs. K C SUBBA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The 9th defendant (auction-purchaser) is the appellant.

(2.) The plaintiff, Chinna Subba Rao, and the 1st defendant, GurulingeswaraRao, are brothers. They are the sons of Nagendram who died in the year 1955. Nagendram is the brother of Pullayya. After the death of Nagendram, Pullayya, the plaintiff and the 1st defendant continued as members of the joint family. Pullayya and Gurulingeswara Rao (1st defendant) borrowed some amount on a promissory note from one Hanumantha Rao. Hanumantha Rao filed O.S. No. 142 of 1968 against Pullayya and the 1st defendant, the executants of the promissory note and obtained a decree in 1969. In execution of the said decree, the joint family property was brought to sale. The appellant herein purchased the same in the court auction on 22-10-1970 for a sum of Rs. 12,500/- and is in possession ever since. The sale was sought to be set aside by the 1 st defendant unsuccessfully and the application filed by him under Order 21, Rule 90, Civil Procedure Code was dismissed on 12-10-1976.

(3.) Then begins the present round of litigation. The plaintiff filedthe present suit out of which this appeal arises, for partition and possession of his one-fourth share in the property sold in execution of the decree obtained against Pullayya and Gurulingeswara Rao, the other members of the joint family. The main contention of the plaintiff was that the decree in O.S. No. 142 of 1968 is not binding on him, that there was a division in the family and that he had been living as a divided member for several years. The trial court found that the plaintiff is a member of the joint firmly of which Pullayya was the manager, that there was no division as alleged by the plaintiff and that the decree in O.S. No. 142 of 1968 and the sale in execution thereof are binding on him. On these findings, the trial Court dismissed the suit.