(1.) As soon as the adjudication was made against Kasipathi Aiyar he ceased to be the owner of the equity of redemption on 29th February 1916 as his property vested at once either in the court or in the Receiver as the case may be (Section 16 Clause 2(a) of the Provincial Insolvency Act (III of 1907). The decree for sale obtained in July 1916 in a suit in which a person was impleaded as defendant who had no right whatever in the property ordered to be sold is a nullity so far as the true owner (not made a party to that suit) is concerned, unless the case is governed by the doctrine of lispendens which cannot affect the Court or the Receiver. The sale held in execution of such a futile decree stands in no better footing than the decree itself.
(2.) The appellants defence was therefore rightly rejected by the Lower Appellate court and this Second Appeal fails with costs payable by the appellant. Spencer, J.
(3.) The appellant sold a house to one Kasipathy Aiyar on June 12th 1914. For the unpaid portion of the purchase money he instituted a suit on March 22nd 1916 and obtained a decree on July 11th 1916 establishing his vendor s lien over the house. Kasipathy Iyer applied on November, 19th 1915 to be adjudicated insolvent. An adjudication was made on February 29th 1916, and on July 15th an order was passed by the Insolvency Court vesting the insolvent s property in the Official Receiver. The Official Receiver sold this item of property to the respondent on 17th August 1916. The appellant executed his decree and purchased the property himself on December 22nd 1916.