AJIT SINGH Vs. ARJAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner here is the auctioner purchaser who, at an auction held on September 6, 1984 purchased the land in suit for a sum of Rs. 1,65,000/-. This property had been put to sale to recover the decretal amount of Rs. 90,000/- which was ordered to be paid by Pritam Singh, Judgment-debtor, the father of the respondents-Arjan Singh and husband of Kartar Kaur. After this round of litigation had concluded, Arjan Singh, the minor son of Judgment-debtor Pritam Singh and Kartar Kaur then filed the present suit claiming that the property sold was coparcenary property and was not liable for attachment and sale for payment of the said amount of Rs. 90,000/- which had been decreed against the judgment-debtor-Pritam Singh.

(2.) The entire controversy in this case apparently hinges upon the question-whether this amount of Rs. 90,000/- which Pritam Singh was held liable to pay, would be a debt for discharge of which coparcenary property can be sold ? This would clearly not be an appropriate stage or occasion to express any opinion on this matter, but keeping in view the entire circumstances of the case and of the parties, in the larger interests of justice, the petitioner-auction purchaser is permitted to recover possession of half of the property in suit and retain it during the pendency of the suit, subject to the condition that in the even of the suit of the plaintiffs being decreed, he shall hand over vacant possession of this land to the plaintiffs regardless of any objection or dispute that he may wish to raise in this behalf. In may be clarified that no objection or dispute with regard to possession of this land, at the instance of the petitioner, if the suit of the plaintiffs is decreed, shall be entertained either by the executing court or by the lower appellate Court unless possession of the land has been handed back to the plaintiff.

(3.) The impugned order of the lower appellate Court is modified in these terms and this revision petition is disposed of accordingly. Costs of this petition shall be costs in the suit.