The person to whom the purchase money has been paid within the meaning of O. 21, R. 93, C. P. C. is the person who has actually received the purchase money and had the benefit of taking full satisfaction of the decree-debt.

CHENNAKESAV REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision petition arises out of execution proceedings initiated by the auction purchaser, the first respondent herein under O, 21, R. 93, C. P. C, for recovery of the purchase money and other expenses from the decree-holder and the judgment-debtor, the petitioner and the second respondent respectively in the revision petition.

( 2 ) THE decree-holder and judgment-debtor are brothers. The decree-holder obtained three money decrees against his brother in three suits in O. S. No. 17 of 1956, O. S. No. 63/55 and O. S. No. 2 of 1956 on the file of the District Court, East Godavari at Rajahmundry. All the three decrees were compromise decrees creating a charge on three items of property belonging to the judgment-debtor.

( 3 ) IN execution of the decree in O. S. No. 17 of 1956, the decree-holder brought Item No. 1 of the charged property to sale, in E. P. No. 13 of 1960. The auction was held on 28-8-1961. . The first respondent was the highest bidder for Rupees 13,000/ -. He deposited into the Court the entire sale price by 6-9-1961 as required under the conditions of sale. The sale was posted for confirmation to 19-7-1962.

( 4 ) WHILE the matters stood thus, one Karri Mahalakshmi and Nookaraju, hereinafter referred to as Karri People filed E. A. No. 198 of 1961 on the file of the District Court under O. 21, R. 89, Civil P. C. for setting aside the Court sale. They deposited into the Court Rs. 4,950. 00 representing the sale warrant amount, the poundage and solatium. The decree-holder, the judgment-debtor and the auction purchaser opposed the application. The principal ground on which this application was opposed was that the Karri people had no existing interest in the property within the meaning of O. 21, R. 89, C. P. C. The objection did not find favour with the learned District Judge and E. A. No. 198 of 1961 was dismissed on 17-7-1962. Thereupon, the sale in favour of the first respondent was confirmed and a sale certificate Ex. A-1 was issued. Aggrieved against the said decision, Karri people preferred C. M. A. No. 336 of 1962 to this Court. But since no stay was granted in (sic) the C. M. A. No. 336 of 1962 was allowed by this Court on 6-9-1966 and the karri people took back possession of the property in question on 15-3-1967 from the respondent No. 1. The first respondent then filed the E. A. out of which this revision petition arises on 17-7-1967 for recovery of purchase money and other expenses incurred by him.

( 5 ) DURING the pendency of the above C. M. A. in the High Court the decree-holder filed execution applications and withdrew the amount of Rs. 4,950. 00 towards the decree amount in O. S. No. 17 of 1956. He also filed E. P. No. 80 of 1960 in O. S. No. 63 of 1955. The sale of the other two items of property was ordered and the sale was posted to 20-7-1972. Then the wife of the judgment-debtor filed E. A. No. 136 of 1962 under O. 21, R. 69 (3) and Ss. 47 and 151, C. P. C. seeking to stop the sale and requesting the Court to pay the amount lying to the credit of the judgment-debtor in O. S. No. 17 of 1956 and enter full satisfaction. It was not opposed by the decree-holder. So the entire decree amount was paid and full satisfaction was recorded in O. S. No. 63 of 1955. Still a sum of Rupees 342-37 P. remained to the credit of the judgment-debtor in O. S. No. 17 of 1956. The decree holder filed another E. A. No. 145 of 1962 in O. S. 2 of 1956 for the payment of the said balance of the amount of Rs. 342-37 P. and recording part satisfaction of the decree. That E. A. was allowed. In the result, the decree-holder withdrew the entire sale price deposited by the auction purchaser.

( 6 ) THE Court below held that the auction purchaser is entitled to recover from the decree holder the amount of Rs. 12,770-31 P. with interest at 6% per annum from 15-3-1967 onwards on the said amount till the said amount is deposited or paid directly to the auction-purchaser. The learned Additional District Judge

Click Here to Read the rest of this document