A purchaser of a property subject to an ejectment decree is entitled to execute the decree under Order 21 Rule 16 or Section 146 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

( 1 ) THIS appeal, which has been argued well on both sides and fully in all its details, raises a very interesting and important question.

( 2 ) THE appeal relates to the respondent's right to execute a decree for ejectment. The decree was passed in respect of the disputed premises, comprising one go-down in the ground floor of Municipal Premises No. 68, Burtolla Street. Calcutta. It was obtained by the then landlords Indramoni Debi and others (Trustees) against the tenant (judgment-debtor) Chitra Gupta Press on May 12. 1961 Thereafter, the present respondent No. 1. Bhagirathi Debi Agarwalla, purchased the disputed premises from the said landlords Indramoni Debi and others (Trustees), who are the other respondents in this appeal, under a conveyance, by which the entire interest of the said landlords in the disputed premises passed. This conveyance was dated March 30, 1963. On May 17, 1963, the purchaser Bhagirathi applied for execution of the above decree for ejectment and, along with the said application for execution, filed an application for leave to execute the same on substitution in place of the original decree-holders Indramoni Debi and others (Trustees), her vendors. After service of notice on the judgment-debtor, the present appellant Ambika Prosad Saxena, entered appearance and filed an objection under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure on July 18, 1963, alleging inter alia that the judgment-debtor Chitragupta Press was the sole proprietary concern of his predecessor, Kamta Prasad Saxena. who had died on October 5, 1960, that is, during the pendency of the ejectment suit in question, and in whose place there was no substitution therein, and that the applicant for execution. Bhagirathi Debi Agarwalla, had no locus standi to execute the above decree, as under the law, she was not entitled to that right.

( 3 ) TO this petition of objection under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, there was a rejoinder by Bhagirathi, denying, in effect, the objector Ambika Prosad's contentions.

( 4 ) THE learned Judge in the court below took up the matter of the respondent Bhagirathi's locus standi or right to execute the decree in question as a preliminary point and decided the same in her favour. Hence this appeal by the appellant Ambika Prosad.

( 5 ) THAT learned Judge in the Court below has made it clear that, in his aforesaid order, he has dealt only with the question of the respondent Bhagirathi's locus standi to execute the above decree and he has not considered any of the other points, raised in the appellant's objection under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which points were intended to be taken up by him after disposal of the above question of locus standi if the said question be, as it has now been found in favour of the said respondent.

( 6 ) IN this appeal, it is contended on behalf of the appellant, Ambika Prosad Saxena, that the learned Judge in the court below was entirely wrong in overruling the appellant's objection that the respondent No. 1, as purchaser, as aforesaid, had no locus standi to execute the decree in question. This was put on the ground that, in the conveyance by which the said respondent's purchase was made, there was no assignment of the said decree, and accordingly. Order 21 Rule 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which, according to the appellant, would be the only relevant provision if any, to aid the said respondent in the matter, would not be applicable.

( 7 ) IN our view, the decision of the learned Judge in the court below on the above question of locus standi in favour of the respondent No. 1 is correct in the facts and circumstances of this case and, on the materials before us, that decision should be affirmed.

( 8 ) IT is clear from the respondent No. 1's conveyance (Ext. 2), dated March 30, 1963, that thereby she acquired, from the original decree-holders (trustees), who were her vendors, the whole of the Municipal Premises No. 68. Burtoll