Ratio:
Auction purchaser in an execution proceeding becomes the owner of the property purchased by him immediately on its confirmation and not from the date of taking possession.

1. This appeal is filed against the order dated 04.08.2009 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Puducherry at Karaikal, in E.A.No.62 of 2006 in E.P.No.57 of 2004 in O.S.No.59 of 2000, in and by which, the application filed by the 1st respondent herein to remove the obstruction raised by the appellant herein and put her into the possession of suit schedule property, was allowed.

2. The facts, which are necessary to decide the issue involved in this appeal, are as follows:

(a) The 1st respondent, viz., Rajamani, has filed O.S.No.59 of 2000 against the 2nd respondent before the Additional District Court, Puducherry at Karaikal for recovery of a sum of Rs.3,81,250/- with interest at 18% per annum on the principal sum of Rs.2,50,000/- and the same was decreed in favour of the 1st respondent/plaintiff by a judgment and decree dated 20.04.2001. The 1st respondent/decree holder filed E.P.No.39 of 2001 to conduct an auction sale of the petition mentioned property and since no payment was made, proclamation was ordered. Thereafter, the decree holder moved an application to participate in the auction sale since no bidder had come forward to participate in the auction and the application was allowed. The sale was conducted on 10.02.2003 and the decree holder became the auction purchaser. In the meantime, the 2nd respondent has filed a petition to set aside the sale; but, by order dated 24.06.2004, the said petition was dismissed and the sale was confirmed. Thereafter, the 1st respondent/auction purchaser filed E.P.No.57 of 2004 for taking delivery of the said property and the same was allowed by ordering delivery. Pursuant to the same, the 1st respondent went to the suit property to take delivery on 27.02.2006 along with the Court Amin and at that time, the appellant herein, who is the brother of the judgment debtor, resisted the same by way of a written objection to the court Amin, stating that the said property, namely No.7, Veerapillai Street, Thirumalairayan-pattinam is his forefathers property, which remains undivided and he is having a share in the said property. Hence, the 1st respondent herein filed an application in E.A.No.62 of 2006 before the trial court to put the 1st respondent in possession of the property after removing the obstruction raised by the appellant herein.

(b) The appellant contested the same by filing a counter and stated that the subject property was originally owned by his father Gopalakrishna Chettiar, who got the same under a partition deed of the year 1954; the appellant got the same through the Will executed by his ancestors and he leased out the property orally to his brother Lakshmi Narayanan, the 2nd respondent/judgment debtor for a period of three years. Subsequently, by way of an additional counter, the appellant has stated that the appellant got the property through a Will executed by his father, who got the said property by way of a partition deed of the year 1954. Further, he has stated that one of his brothers, viz., Varadarajan, did not spend any amount for acquiring this property by their father and in the partition deed dated 15.12.1975, this item of property was not included and that the 2nd respondent was never in possession and enjoyment of the property. The subject property was exclusively owned and held by the appellant and his clan and the auction purchase made by the decree holder is not binding on the appellant. The 1st respondent, by suppressing these facts, brought the property for court auction fraudulently. Thus, the obstruction petition has to be dismissed.

(c) Before the trial court, on the side of the decree holder, P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.P-1 to P-7 were marked and on the side of the appellant/obstructor, R.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.R-1 to R-10 were marked. The executing court, after analyzing the entire evidence, has allowed the petition on a finding that the obstructor, who is the brother of the judgment debtor, has created a Will to