Dismissed

C. Sekar v. Subramani (Deceased)

Madras HC14 Oct 2020CRP/120/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 CPC praying to set aside an order dismissing an application to implead legal representatives of a judgment debtor. The bench upheld the Trial Court's dismissal, holding that with the decree passed and execution terminated, the petitioner cannot seek impleading in the suit but must take appropriate proceedings under Section 152 CPC.

What did the court decide?

Revoked the liberty to correct survey number under Section 152 CPC was preserved; Revision Petition dismissed.

C. Sekar Vs Subramani (Deceased) — Property and Title | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

CRP NPD. No.120 of 2018 and CMP No.659 of 2018

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 14.10.2020

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN

¶6

CRP (NPD). No.120 of 2018
and CMP No.659 of 2018
C.Sekar .. Petitioner
Vs.
Subramani (deceased)
1. Thirupuram
2. Rathinambal
3. Puttiyappam
4. Amudhan
5. Akila
6. Panchanathan
7. Chitra
8. Vasudevan
9. Govindammal
10.Prasanth
11.Praveen Kumar ..Respondents

¶7

PRAYER: PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of the

¶8

1/6

¶9

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶10

CRP NPD. No.120 of 2018 and CMP No.659 of 2018

¶11

Code of Civil Procedure, praying to set aside the fair and decreetal order of the trial Court made in I.A.No.156 of 2014 in O.S.No.202 of 1998 on the file of Sub Court, Maduranthagam dated 27.03.2017.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Kumanaraja For Respondents : Mr.P.Gopiraja ORDER This matter is taken up for hearing through Video-Conferencing.

¶13

The plaintiff in OS No.202 of 1998 has come up with this Civil Revision Petition. Challenging an order dismissing his application in IA No.156 of 2014 filed under Order 22 Rule 4 seeking impleading of the legal representatives of the judgment debtor in the suit.

¶14

2. The suit was filed for specific performance of an agreement of sale. A decree came to be passed on 30.06.2000. Pursuant to the decree,

¶15

the Executing Court executed a Sale Deed in favour of the petitioner on

¶16

28.12.2005. It is also stated that the petitioner has been put in possession of

¶17

2/6

¶18

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶19

CRP NPD. No.120 of 2018 and CMP No.659 of 2018

¶20

the property even under the agreement. Claiming that the legal representatives of the judgment debtor are attempting to interfere with his possession on the ground that there is a mistake in the survey number in the plaint as well as the Sale deed, the petitioner came up with the present Application to implead the legal representatives of the deceased of the

¶21

judgment debtor as defendants in the suit to enable him to seek the amendment of the decree.

¶22

3. The learned Trial Judge by the order impugned in this Revision dismissed the said application on the ground that there is no proceeding

¶23

pending in order to implead the legal representatives.

¶24

4. I have heard Mr.A.Kumanaraja, learned counsel appearing for the

¶25

petitioner and Mr.P.Gopiraja, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶26

5. I am unable to fault the Trial Court for having dismissed the

¶27

application. Even according to the petitioner, the suit was decreed as early 3/6

¶28

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶29

CRP NPD. No.120 of 2018 and CMP No.659 of 2018

¶30

as on 30.06.2000 and execution proceedings have also been terminated. If
the petitioner has got any grievance he has to work out the same against the
legal representatives as per law. He cannot seek impleading of the legal
representatives in the suit. Therefore, the learned Trial Judge was justified
in dismissing the application. Hence the Civil Revision Petition is
dismissed .
6. It is open to the petitioner to take such appropriate proceeding as
may be available to him under law to have the survey number corrected by
applying to the Court under Section 152 of the Code of the Civil Procedure.
Preserving that liberty, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed . No costs.
Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
14.10.2020
jv
Index:No
Internet:Yes
Speaking Order

¶31

4/6

¶32

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶33

CRP NPD. No.120 of 2018 and CMP No.659 of 2018

¶34

¶35

The Sub Court, Maduranthagam.

¶36

The Section Officer, V.R.Section, High Court of Madras.

¶37

5/6

¶38

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶39

CRP NPD. No.120 of 2018 and CMP No.659 of 2018

¶40

R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.

¶41

¶42

CRP (NPD). No.120 of 2018
and CMP No.659 of 2018
14.10.2020

¶43

6/6

¶44

http://www.judis.nic.in

C. Sekar v. Subramani (Deceased)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C. Sekar v. Subramani (Deceased)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kanniappan Vs Thana Kotteshwari

S. Ramachandran Vs P. Sivakumar

R.Manivannan Vs R. Ramalingam

Zainab Sabira Vs S.Imtiaz Ahmed

Kanthamma Vs Sarojammal

Chinnammal Vs Sadhasivam