M AGEM RAO Vs. NEERALA BANDI LINGAM
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
M.AGEM RAO,MADADI NARASIMHA RAO
NEERLA RANGAIAH,NEERALA BANDI LINGAM
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) The two appeals arc by some of the defendants in O. S. No. 10
of 1961 and O S. No. 9 of 1961 on the file of the District Munsif,
Sircilla, against whom a decree was passed by the trial court and confirmed in A. S, No. 9
of 1966 and A. S. No. 10 of 1966 by the
learned District Judge, Kareemnagar. The appellants in S A. No.
610 of 1970 are defendants 2, 3 and 7 and the appellants in S. A. 611
of 1970 are defendants 2 and 7 who are the auction purchasers at a
revenue sale held for the recovery of certain excise arrears due from
the respective plaintiffs-respondents herein.
(2.) The lands which form the subject matter of this appeal were
brought to sale for the recovery of excise arrears from the plaintiffs-
respondents therein. A demand notice was issued on 14-4-1955 for
the arrears due from the plaintiffs. The properties in question were
attached on 16-5-1955 and the lands were proposed to be put to sale
on 23-10-1956. But before the date of auction the arrears due were
paid and consequently the sale was not held. There was another
amount of Rs. 3,147-15 Ps. due from the plaintiffs for which the
demand notice was served on the plaintiffs on 7-11-1956. The
Tahsildar who was required to realise the amount by sale of the plaint
schedule properties obtained permission on 12-12-1958 from the
Collector to bring them to sale. These properties, however, dp not
seem to have been attached before they were brought to sale. No proclamation
was also issued fixing and proclaiming any date for the
auction. The auction was however held on 13-8-1959. The Collector
who is the competent authority to confirm the auction, refused to confirm the auction.
(3.) Thereupon the Tahsildar ordered fresh auction on
25-9-1959 and held the same on 1-10-1959. Before holding the auction on 1-10-1959 no
proclamation was issued. This auction was confirmed by the Collector on 10-11-1959. It is at this auction that the
defendants purchased the plaint schedule property, The plaintiffs
claimed that the entire auction proceedings are null and viod ; (1) for
want of attachment of the properties before sale, and (2) for failure to
issue the proclamation.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.