On 2.12.1974, the plaintiff respondent filed an application under Section 38 of the Act praying therein for cancellation of auction sale in favour of the appellant.
Subsequently, the defendant in the suit, by a separate application i.e. I.A. No.
Initially, the respondent, in the said suit, did number implead the State of Tamil Nadu as one of the defendants.
The respondent, on 1.4.1975, filed further objections.
On 4.2.1977, the sale certificate was issued in favour of the appellant and the possession of the land was delivered to him on 11.2.1977.
The trial companyrt after companysidering other issues held that the suit was barred by limitation as the same was number brought within six months of the date when the cause of action to the plaintiff arose.
The appellant herein purchased the said property at the said auction held on 21.11.1974.
The said application was allowed by the trial companyrt on 11.10.
On 12.2.1977, the respondent filed a suit for declaration of his title to the land, delivery of possession of said land to him and for setting aside the auction sale in favour of the appellant.
After the matter was enquired into, the Collector on 11.1.1977, rejected the application of the respondent and companyfirmed the sale in favour of the appellant herein.
164/1979 prayed for impleadment of State of Tamil Nadu as defendant No.
It appears that on the basis of the two objections filed by the respondent, the Collector ordered for an enquiry.
One of the issues was whether the suit brought by the plaintiff was within the period of limitation.
It is against the said judgment of the High Court, the appellant is in appeal before us.
His case was that Subramania Pillai was number the owner of the said property and in fact it belonged to him.
The plaintiff thereafter preferred an appeal before the first appellate companyrt.
LITTTTTTTJ N. KHARE, J. One Subramania Pillai took loan.
In the said proceedings, the land measuring 2 acres 47 cents was put to sale by public auction treating the land as if it was owned by Subramania Pillai.
1979 directing for impleadment of the State of Tamil Nadu.
With the result, the State of Tamil Nadu took proceedings for recovery of dues under Section 5 of the Tamil Nadu Revenue Recovery Act hereinafter referred to as the Act .
The trial companyrt framed several issues.
