PARKASHO DEVI Vs. BRIJ LAL AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is before this Court who has lost in his claim to raise an attachment on a plea made by him that he is a bona fide purchaser. He set up a prior agreement to the date of attachment affected by the Court. So long as the alleged prior agreement was un-registered and the purchase was pending attachment, the issue of bona fide is irrelevant under Order 21 Rule 58 CPC. The dismissal of the application was therefore perfectly justified.

(2.) The counsel states that he is willing to pay the entire amount which is the subject of suit for recovery and the attachment itself has been secured only for realization of the said amount. If the petitioner makes a deposit of the amount claimed in suit and seeks for recording full satisfaction, the decree holder ought to receive the same and if he refuses to do so, the court below will be competent to receive the deposit and order full satisfaction of the amount claimed in suit. The petitioner will be entitled to work out his own remedy in a third party procedure provided under Order 8-A CPC for recovery of the amount from respondent No.2 on whose behalf the amount is sought to be paid.

(3.) The civil revision is disposed of with the above observations.