THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5453 OF 2009 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition, under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is filed against the Judgment, dated 04.08.2008, in A.S.No.72 of 2005, on the file of IV Additional District Judge, Tirupati, whereunder and whereby, the order, dated 26.04.2005, in I.P.No.39 of 2004, on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Tirupati, declaring respondent No.2 herein as insolvent, was set aside and the matter was remitted to Insolvency Court for adjudication of real issue after giving opportunity to both sides to adduce evidence. 2. Heard. 3. Respondent No.2 herein/debtor borrowed a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- from the petitioner herein to meet the kidney operation expenses of her daughter, and executed a Promissory Note on 06.02.2003. Item No.2 of petition schedule property was acquired by respondent No.2 from her husband under a registered gift settlement deed, dated 24.01.2004. On 15.04.2004, respondent No.2 herein alienated item No.2 of petition schedule property in favour of respondent Nos.3 to 6 herein. Thereafter, on 01.07.2004, the petitioner herein filed I.P.No.39 of 2004 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Tirupati, to declare respondent No.2 herein as insolvent. During the pendency of the said proceedings, respondent Nos.3 to 6 herein sold the property in favour of respondent No.1 herein under a registered sale deed, dated 15.07.2004. Thereafter, the Insolvency Petition was allowed, declaring respondent No.2 herein as insolvent and the said property was vested with the Official Receiver. On 20.12.2005, the Official Receiver auctioned the said property, during the subsistence of the stay of the order, dated 26.04.2005, in I.P.No.30 of 2004, passed by IV Additional District Judge, Tirupati, in I.A.No.152 of 2005, in A.S.No.72 of 2005. In the auction, one Sk. Madina became the highest bidder and on 06.01.2006, the Official Receiver executed a sale deed in favour of him. Respondent No.1 herein filed the appeal contending that he is not a party to the insolvency proceedings and that his right, title and interest in the said property are being affected seriously, in view of the fact that he purchased the said property from respondent Nos.3 to 6 herein. The appellate Court, after hearing both sides, set aside the order of trial Court and remitted the matter to the Insolvency Court for adjudication of the real issue with liberty to both the parties to adduce evidence. Challenging the same, the present revision petition is filed. 4. The factual matrix is not in dispute. When the Official Receiver conducted auction in respect of the said property, the third party, being the highest bidder, purchased the property in that auction. Thereafter, the Official Receiver has executed a regular sale deed in favour of the auction purchaser. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner herein, the auction purchaser has to be in possession of the property; that the auction purchaser was not made as a party and in his absence appeal was heard; that in view of the fact that the substantial rights of the auction purchaser have been affected, the appellate Court ought to have impleaded him as a party in the appeal. There is sufficient force in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. The third party purchaser or the auction purchaser is ought to have been impleaded in the appeal, because his right would be adversely effected, if he is not added as a party to the appeal. Hence, the impugned Judgment is liable to be set aside. 5. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed setting aside the impugned Judgment, dated 04.08.2008, in A.S.No.72 of 2005, on the file of IV Additional District Judge, Tirupati. The matter is remanded to the appellate Court with a direction to the petitioner herein to file a petition in the appellate Court to implead the auction purchaser, namely, Sk. Madina, and the Official Receiver in the appeal. Thereafter, after hearing all the parties, the appeal shall be disposed of by the appellate Court in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C. BHANU, J November 23, 2010 MD IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5453 OF 2009 Between: S. Safi .....PETITIONER AND Rehamath Jahan and others ....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5453 OF 2009 November 23, 2010