THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.2817 of 2009 ORDER: The 1st respondent filed Creditors I.P.No.49 of 2002 in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Kadapa against the 2nd respondent-debtor and the petitioner and 3rd respondent-other creditors. The petitioner and the 3rd respondent had mortgages from the 2nd respondent, in their favour, by the time the I.P. was filed. During the pendency of the I.P., a sale deed was executed in favour of the petitioner. The trial Court allowed the I.P. through its order, dated 04.10.2005. It made an observation to the effect that the sale deed in favour of the petitioner marked as Ex.A.5 came into existence during the pendency of the I.P., and annulled the same. The petitioner and the 3rd respondent filed A.S.No.106 of 2005 in the Court of I Additional District Judge, Kadapa. The appeal was dismissed on 28.07.2008. The petitioner feels aggrieved by the annulment of the sale. The limited grievance canvassed in the C.R.P. is that in the event of Ex.A.5 being annulled, the mortgage in his favour must revive, and he must be treated as a secured creditor. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The judgment either in the O.P. or in the appeal is not challenged on merits. For all practical purposes, the petitioner is reconciled to the annulment of Ex.A.5. It needs to be observed that on execution of Ex.A.5, mortgage in favour of the petitioner stood foreclosed. Once the sale deed is set aside, the mortgage must revive and the petitioner must be recognized as a secured creditor. Therefore, the civil revision petition is disposed of with an observation that the annulment of sale deed- Ex.A.5 shall result in revival of the mortgage that existed prior to that in favour of the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. __________ 09.07.2010 JSU THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.2817 of 2009 Date: 09.07.2010 JSU