ABDUL RAHMAN SARKAR Vs. PROMODE BEHARY DUTTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal and the connected Rule No. 280 of 1914 (issued upon an application under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code) arise out of an application under Order XXI, Rule 89 of the Civil Procedure Code, to set aside the sale of a holding in execution of a decree for rent.

(2.) No appeal lies in this case, and we have, therefore, to consider the. question raised in the case in the Rule.

(3.) The question for decision is, whether the petitioner had a locus standi to make the application under Order XXI, Rule 89 of the Civil Procedure Code. The opposite parties are the landlords of the holding, which was sold in execution of a decree for arrears of rent due thereon against the tenant and purchased by the landlords themselves. The petitioner purchased the holding at a sale held in execution of a mortgage-decree against the tenant, prior to the sale for arrears of rent, and was in possession thereof. He applied to have the sale for arrears of rent set aside under Order XXI, Rule 89 of the Code. The holding is an occupancy holding and not transferable without the consent of the landlord. The Courts below held that the petitioner had no locus standi to make the application.