MURUGESA MUDALI Vs. SAMA GOUNDAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondents put in a petition in the Court of the District Munsif to cancel the delivery of certain shops purchased by the decree-holder in execution of a decree passed against the respondents as trustees of a temple.

(2.) The respondents contended that the shops did not belong to the judgment-debtor temple solely but to five other institutions and further contended that even the interest of the debtor temple in the corpus of the shop property could not have been and was not legally sold but only its right to receive a share of the rents and profits.

(3.) We must take it that the petition was filed partly under Section 47 of the Civil Procedure Code (which has been held to apply also to disputes between decree-holder-purchasers and judgment-debtors) and partly under Order XXI, Rule 101. As only one order was passed in respect of both these contentions by each of the lower Courts and as that order has been based mainly on the contention raised by the respondents as trustees of the judgment-debtor temple, we hold that an appeal lies against the order of the District Munsif to the District Court and from the order of the District Court to this Court. We accordingly overrule the preliminary objection raised by the respondents Vakil to the entertainment of this appeal.