Ujjagar Singh v. National Insurance Company Limited & Anr.

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN Present : Mr. S.K. Arora, Advocate T.P.S. MANN, J. Execution application filed by decree holder/Insurance Company under Order XXI Rule 66 C.P.C. was opposed by judgment debtor-petitioner by raising certain objections which were, however, dismissed by the executing Court. Hence, the present revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. In the execution application, it was asserted by the decree holder that the petitioner was owner of 5 bighas 16 biswas of land. The petitioner claimed that he was actual owner of only 3 biswas of land. The fact was that the petitioner had sold some of his land after the attachment. Such a sale effected by the petitioner has to be ignored. Another objection was in respect of the market value of the land. Civil Revision No. 6631 of 2008 - 2 - This objection was inconsequential as the land was to be auctioned and the best price fetched in the auction would be used for satisfaction of the decree. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the entire land of the petitioner be not sold and only such portion may be sold as may be necessary to satisfy the decree. In support of his argument, he has referred to Ambati Narasayya v. M. Subba Rao and another, 1990(1) Recent Revenue Reports 163 (SC). The decree holder has sought recovery of Rs. 6,03,078/- along with interest @ 9% per annum from 28.8.2004 till realization. By now, the amount to be recovered is more than Rs. 8 lac. As per the assessment of the decree holder, the market value of the land is Rs. 2 lac per bigha. The entire land of the petitioner measuring 5 bighas 16 biswas would, thus, fetch about Rs. 11 lac approximately. It would, thus, be not possible to leave out only a small chunk of land of the petitioner from auction and ever its identification may also be cumbersome. In the aforementioned judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the amount claimed in the execution petition was about Rs. 2,400/- whereas land measuring 10 acres was sold for Rs. 17,000/-. Therefore, it is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case. The impugned order does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity. The revision is, therefore, dismissed. December 01, 2008 satish ( T.P.S. MANN ) JUDGE