JHARNA DEBI Vs. SUBAL SADHUKHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ONE Smritimoyee Devi obtained from the court of the Subordinate Judge, Nadia a final decree for Rs. 4,993. 42 paise in Title Suit No. 319 of 19 53 against Syamapada Chatterjee the opposite parties 1 to 6 were the heirs and successors-in interest of said Syamapada Chatterjee. Smritimoyee Devi had filed in the court of the Subordinate Judge, Nadia Title Execution Case No. 92 of 1969 for execution of the said final decree passed in Title Suit no. 319 of 1953 against the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased Syamapada Chatterjee including opposite party nos. l to 6. Opposite party no. 7, Saralabala had obtained decree in Rent Suit no. 1 of 1957 against said Smritimoyee Devi, who had filed the execution Case No. 92 of 1969. Saralabala, in execution of the said rent decree had attached the decree in Title Suit No. 319 of 1953 obtained by Smritimoyee Devi against Syamapada Chatterjee. Thereafter, saralabala was substituted as the decree-holder in said Title execution Case No. 92 of 1969 of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, nadia.

(2.) IN the execution petition filed in Title Execution Case No. 92 of 1969, execution was prayed for against two lots of properties. Subsequently, the schedule of the said execution petition was amended by inter alia expunging lot no. 2 and by adding as lot no. 2 the land and buildingsinno. 94, Govinda Sarak being Holding No. 10, Ward No. 22 of Krishnagar Municipality measuring 6 decimals. The notices of attachment of the said properties were purported to be served. Thereafter, notices under Order 21 Rule 66 of the Code of Civil Procedure were issued in the names of the judgment-debtors. In the sale proclamation drawn up, the value of the said Premises No. 94 Govinda Sarak being Holding No. 10, Ward No. 22 of Krishnagar Municipality was stated to be approximately Rs. 2,500/ -. On 12th February, 1973 auction sale of the property was held and the petitioners bid for Rs. 5,300/-, being the highest, was accepted.

(3.) ON 24th March, 1973, Ranendra Prosad, Rathmdra Prosad, Alakendu prosad and Nilima Devi, the opposite parties 2,3,4 and 5 had filed Miscellaneous Case No. 30 of 1973 under Order 21 Rule 90 of the Code for setting aside the sand auction sale dated 12th February, 1973. On 27th July, 1973 the said Misc. Case was disposed of in terms of a solenama between the opposite parties 2,3,4 and 5 and the present petitioner. The opposite party Nos. 1 and 6 did not join in the solenama. On 1st August, 1973, the sale in favour of the petitioner was confirmed; on 27th August, 1973, he had taken possession of the property.