Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.SATHISH KUMAR
Sadachi [died] – Appellant
Versus
P.C. Mariappan [died] – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. sale deed and execution petitions filed (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding validity of auction and recovery (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's observations on execution procedures (Para 7 , 9) |
| 4. violation of order xxi rule 64 (Para 8) |
| 5. final order allowing the petitions (Para 10) |
ORDER :
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.
Challenging the impugned Order passed by the execution Court dismissing the application filed under section 47 and 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, to set aside the sale deed dated 22.08.1996, the present Civil Revision Petitions have been filed.
2. This revision petitioner in CRP [NPD] No.1936 of 2024 has been filed by the judgment debtor. The Civil Revision Petition in CRP [NPD] No.2052 has been filed by the subsequent purchaser to an extent of 77 ½ cents from the judgment debtor. These revisions have been filed to set aside the sale deed on the ground of irregularity.
3. Brief background of filing these Civil Revision Petitions is as follows :
The decree holder, viz., the first respondent has filed a suit in O.S.No.1494 of 1983 for recovery of a sum of Rs.1253.25 based on the promissory note said to have been executed on 03.01.1981 with interest at the rate of 12% p
The sale of property in execution of a decree must comply with procedural rules, only necessitating sufficient property to satisfy the decree amount, failing which the sale is invalid.
![Sadachi [died] vs P.C. Mariappan [died] - 2024 Supreme(Mad) 2531](https://supremetoday-s3.b-cdn.net/Madras_2.png)
Execution sales must adhere to the limitations set by procedural rules to ensure justice, with only sufficient property sold to satisfy the decree amount.
The court emphasized the application of Order XXI Rule 90 of the CPC in cases of substantial irregularities causing injury to the judgment-debtor and cited legal precedents to support its decision.
The executing court must ensure only necessary property is sold to satisfy a decree, and dismissal of a claim under Order XXI Rule 58 does not bar a subsequent application under Order XXI Rule 90 for....
whether Section 35 of the Act is mandatory or directory the sale held in violation of the said provision is only illegal but not a nullity and therefore, it can be set aside only in the manner and th....
Execution application barred by limitation; auction sale legitimacy not reviewable under current application framework.
An execution court is obligated to sell only such portion of the property as is necessary to satisfy the decree, and selling the entire property without examining this aspect is illegal and without j....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
