GOBARDHAN DAS Vs. JANKIDAS BANSIDHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Bhagirath Agarwal of Maharashtra obtained a decree against opposite parties 1 to 4 to this application. The decree was transferred to Begusarai and was numbered as M. Execution Case 67 of 1963. In this execution case certain property of judgment-debtor was sold on 23-8-1965. The sale was confirmed on 2-12-1965 and the execution case was dismissed on satisfaction. After obtaining the sale-certificate the decree-holder tried to obtain delivery of possession. There was obstruction to the delivery of possession. Presumably, because of that the decree-holder Bhagirath Agarwal Is said to have sold the property purchased by him in the execution case to the petitioners by a sale-deed dated 28-12-1967. On 10-1-1968 a petition was filed by the petitioners praying for substitution, of the petitioners in place of the original decree-holder. By order dated 8-2-1968 the Court ordered the petitioners to be substituted, subject to affidavit being filed by the Original Decree-Holder. Notices were issued to the original decree-holder in respect of the matter of substitution which was served on 5-7-1968. The petitioners filed a petition praying for delivery of possession against the judgment-debtor. The learned Subordinate Judge rejected the application on the ground that the requirements of the Patna amendment to the proviso of Order 21, Rule 16 have not been fulfilled, inasmuch as affidavit admitting the transfer has not been filed by the transferor decree-holder and as such the application for permission to execute the decree has to be rejected. The court also referred to two Orders 145 and 146 whereby it had directed the petitioners to establish their "locus standi" to the satisfaction of the court. Civil Revision 602 of 1969 and miscellaneous appeal No. 147 of 1969 are directed against this order. On the same day, a later order was passed by which all interim steps taken on behalf of the petitioners as also the petitions filed on their behalf have been rejected. This order was challenged in civil revision 604 of 1969. By order dated 20-3-1969 the Court dismissed the execution case itself in view of the fact that no steps were taken by the original decree-holder. Civil Revision 603 of 1969, is directed against this order.

(2.) The learned Advocate General appearing for the petitioners raised the following points:

(3.) Order 21, Rule 16 as amended by the Patna High Court may first be quoted :