MOOLCHAND AGRAWAL Vs. BABULAL AGRAWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three appeals have been preferred by three different defendants assailing the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court decreeing the suit of plaintiffs.

(2.) A suit for declaration and injunction has been filed by plaintiffs that the sale certificate dated 20-12-1997 issued in regard to house NO. 66 and 244 Ward No. 15 district Satna is null and void. Plaintiffs further prayed, that if during the pendency of the suit, defendant Nos. 1 and 2 takes possession of the suit property, then possession be obtained from them and be delivered to plaintiffs, it has further been prayed that the amount of rent which is realized by defendant Nos. 1 and 2 from tenants inducted in the suit house, be paid to the plaintiffs.

(3.) In brief the suit of plaintiffs is that there was an order for realization of the sale tax against defendant No. 3 M/s. Jeevanlal Durga Prasad. In order to realise the sales tax, suit houses were attached and ultimately sold in auction. Defendant No. 1 Parasram purchased the suit house bearing House No. 224 for Rs 46,600/- and defendant No. 2 Moolchand Agrawal purchased the house No. 66 for Rs. 12000/-. Both these suit houses were purchased in auction sale. In both these houses tenants were inducted and defendant Nos. 1 and 2 are realizing the rent from the tenants. This fact is not disputed by the defendants that this Court in Miscellaneous Petition Nos. 296/80,299/ 80 and 53/83, set aside the proceedings of auction sale and further directed that the petitioner of writ petition must be put in the same position by the respondents as if there had been no order of assessment passed against him. These orders were passed on 24-8-1992.