Order:-This is a civil revision petition against the order of the learned District Munsif, Sattur, dismissing the petition filed by the civil revision petitioner praying for rateable distribution of the proceeds of the sale of immovable properties effected in E.P.No 331 of 1974, in O.S. No. 485 of 1972. The civil revision petitioner filed O.S.No. 128 of 1972 or the file of the District Court, Ramanathapuram at Madurai, and obtained a decree against the defendant in the suit. The respondent herein, filed O.S.No. 485 of 1972 on the file of the District Munsif’s Court, Sattur, and obtained a decree against the same defendant. Both, the decrees were for payment of monies. The civil revision petitioner filed an execution petition in the Sub-Court of Ramanathapuram at Madurai for attachment and sale of the immovable properties of the judgment-debtor. The respondent herein in execution of the decree obtained by him in the aforesaid O.S No.485 of 1972 filed E.P.No.331 of 1974 in the District Munsif’s Court, Sattur, for attachment and sale of the same in movable properties in pursuance of the decree against the same defendant. While the petition in the Sub-Court filed by the civil revision petitioner was pending, the properties were sold in Court auction in pursuance of the proceedings in execution in the Court of the District Munsif, Sattur, and the amount realised by the sale of the properties was deposited into Court. Thereupon, the civil revision petitioner ceased to pursue the execution proceedings in the Sub-Court. Instead, he applied to the District Munsif’s Court, Sattur, for rateable distribution of the amount which was held in deposit to the credit of O.S. No. 485 of 1972. The learned District Munsif was of the view that because the execution petition in pursuance of the decree in the aforesaid O.S.No. 128 of 1972 was not pending in his Court, the petitioner is not entitled to rateable distribution. He, therefore, dismissed the petition. Aggrieved by this order of the learned District Munsif, the decree-holder in O.S.No.128of 1972 has preferred this civil revision petition.

2. The matter in dispute is simple and is covered by authority. The Sub-Court of Raman athapuram is a Court of higher grade than the District Munsif’s Court, Sattur, and is in fact the Court which has appellate jurisdiction over the District Munsif’s Court, Sattur. Section 63,ICivil Procedure Code lays down that-

“Where property not in the custody of any Court is under attachment in execution of decrees of more Courts than one, the Court which shall receive or realise such property and shall determine any claim thereto and any objection to the attachment thereof shall be the Court of highest grade, or, where there is no difference in grade between such Courts, the Court under whose decree the property was first attached”, Section 73, Civil Procedure Code under which the application was filed for rateable distribution has to be read with section 63, Civil Procedure Code. Thus read, ‘the civil revision petitioner is entitled to rateable distribution. This position is covered by authorities.

3. In Magraj Iswaradas v. The Corporation of Madras1, a Bench of this Court has laid down that the application for rateable distribution was sustainable under section 73 read with section 63, Civil Procedure Code, in similar circumstances. The facts leading to the decision in that case are stated thus:

“The decrees in favour of the respondents (The Madras Corporation) were passed by the High Court on its Original Side ; so was the decree in favour of the appellant. The former decrees were sent to the Sub-Court, Chingleput, for execution; the latter to the District Court, Chingleput. In pursuance of the respondent’s decrees the properties were attached by the Sub-Court in January, 1932 and the sale was held on the 28th September, 1932. The Corporation obtained leave to bid and was allowed to set-off the purchase price against the decree amount. As the amount due to it exceeded

Click Here to Read the rest of this document