AIR 1963 MADRAS 127 ::1975 MadLW 674 ::(1962) 2 MadLJ526

Madras High Court

Hon'ble Judge(s): S. Ramachandra Iyer , C.J. AND Kunhamed Kutti , J

Limitation Act (9 of 1908) , Art.182(5)— Revival and continuation of previous execution - First and subsequent petitions for identical relief, namely for sale of defendant's property - First petition becoming infructuous by mention of wrong property in sale papers - Second petition held one for revival. decree-holder filed an execution petition for sale of the judgment-debtor's property. But at the time he was asked to file the sale papers, he put up to sale some other property and it was actually sold. The judgment-debtor did not bring to the notice of the decree-holder that the property that was sought to be sold did not belong to him. Subsequently the sale was set aside on the ground that a wrong property had been sold. The decree-holder filed another execution petition to sell the judgment-debtor's property and prayed for revival of the earlier execution petition, the sale in which had become infructuous. It was contended that the second execution petition was barred by time : Held that the petition filed for identical relief, namely "for sale of an undivided half in the entire property" was for revival of the old petition, which was one in accordance with law and which resulted in infructuous sale of the property and therefore no question of limitation arose. .....