The main legal point established in the judgment is that an application for execution filed by the legal representatives of a deceased decree-holder, without obtaining orders from the court which passed the decree, is not a nullity and the procedural irregularity is a curable defect. Additionally, the court clarified that an application for delivery of possession of properties purchased at a court auction sale does not fall within the scope of Order XXI R.16, CPC.

1. This revision petition has been filed against an order passed by the District Judge of Palghat allowing E. A. No 13 of 1975 filed by the legal representatives of the decree-holder in O.S.No. 7960 of 1971 of the Madras City Civil Court to amend the petition E. A. No. 4 of 1975 filed by them for effecting delivery of possession of the properties covered by a sale certificate by substituting the names of the legal representatives of the deceased judgment-debtor. The revision petitioners before us are the legal representatives of the deceased judgment-debtor in O S. No 7960 of 1971 who were respondents in E. A. No. 13 of 1975

2. The suit O. S. No. "960 of 1971 was filed by Sri. P. N. Ganesan against one Sri. C. S. Venkateswara Iyer for the recovery of the principal and interest due under two promissory notes. The suit was decreed in the plaintiff's favour on 1st March, 1972. The decree-holder moved the City Civil Court, Madras by filing E P. No. 640 of 1973 praying that the decree may be transferred to the District Court, Palghat for execution. That petition was allowed. Thereafter the decree-holder filed E. P. No. 7 of 1973 in the District Court, Palghat on 15 31973 for execution of the decree by attachment and sale of certain immovable properties belonging to the judgment-debtor. Pursuant to the orders passed on that application the judgment debtor's properties were sold in execution on 25-3-1974 and purchased by the decree-holder for Rs. 26,005/-. That sale was confirmed by the executing court (District Court, Palghat) on 29 5-1974. Subsequent thereto, the decree-holder died on 2911 1974. The respondent herein who are the legal representatives of the decree-holder applied to the District Court, Palghat on 26 51975 as per E.A. No. 4 of 1975 in E.P. No. 7 of 1973 for delivery of possession of the properties covered by the sale certificate. They also filed E.A. No. 3 of 1975 in the same court praying that they should be brought on record as the legal representatives of the decree-holder-auction purchaser. On 27 91975 the executing court (District Court, Palghat) dismissed E A No. 3 of 1975 holding that the application for impleading legal representatives of the deceased decree-holder could be entertained only by the court which passed the decree and that the transferee court had no jurisdiction to entertain such an application. The petition E. A. No. 4 was however kept pending in the same court.

3. Very shortly thereafter, the judgment-debtor also died on 30 91975.On 4101975 the legal representatives of the decree-holder applied to the City Civil Court, Madras as per CMP. No. 4849 of 1975 under O.21 R.16 CPC. to get themselves impleaded as legal representatives of the decree-holder auction purchaser. They also filed C.M.P. No. 4850 of 1975 before the same court to implead the respondents herein as the legal representatives of the deceased judgment debtor. Both those petitions were allowed by the City Civil Court, Madras. It was subsequent thereto that the respondents herein filed E. A. No. 13 of 1975 before the District Court, Palghat on 7111975 to amend the pending application E A. No. 4 of 1975 by adding therein the names of the revision petitioners as legal representatives of the deceased judgment-debtor. By the order dated 24 111975 now sought to be revised the lower court allowed that application.

4. It is necessary to mention at this stage that the deceased judgment-debtor had, prior to his death, filed E.A. No. 7 of 1975 before the lower court (District Court, Palghat) praying that the execution sale should be set aside under S.47 and 151 of the Civil Procedure Code. In that application the legal representatives of the deceased decree-holder had been shown as the respondents. After the death of the judgment-debtor the revision petitioners filed E.A. No. 11 of 1975 before the executing court (transferee court) to get themselves impleaded as supplemental petitioners in E.A. No. 7 of 1975 in their capacity as the l