A Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution to set aside an executing court order breaking open a lock and restore property possession was dismissed as the executing courts findings needed no interference.
The civil revision petition was dismissed. No costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CRP. No. 3224 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 13.12.2023
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI
CRP No. 3224 of 2023 and CMP No. 19889 of 2023
R.Sathya
...Petitioner
Vs.2
Periyasamy (Died) 1.Angathal 2.Venkatachalam 3.Jayakodi
....Respondents
PRAYER : This petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the docket order dated 10.03.2023 order passed by the Executing court in E.A No. 6 of 2023 in E.A No. 1 of 2022 in E.P No. 42 of 2017 in O.S No. 280 of 2013 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Dharapuram and restore possession of the property to the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.Deivasigamani For Respondents : Mr.M.Guruprasad.
1
CRP. No. 3224 of 2023
ORDER
This petition has been filed to set aside the docket order dated
10.03.2023 order passed by the Executing court in E.A No. 6 of 2023 in E.A No. 1 of 2022 in E.P No. 42 of 2017 in O.S No. 280 of 2013 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Dharapuram and restore possession of the property to the petitioner.
the respondents herein filed E.A No. 6 of 2023 on 07.03.2023 to break open the lock with the aid of the police. The Trial Court without hearing the petitioner's side passed the order as such is not maintainable. Hence, he prays to allow this petition. On the other side, the learned counsel for the respondents submit that the petitioner has already filed the obstruction petition in E.A No. 3 of 2023 and the same was dismissed by the executing Court. Therefore, as on date, obstruction petition filed by the tenant also been dismissed. Hence, the Trial Court rightly ordered the said application which needs no interference. Considering the submission made by the respondent, the order passed by the executing Court needs no interference.
2
CRP. No. 3224 of 2023
Consequentially, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
13.12.2023
pbl
To
3
CRP. No. 3224 of 2023
T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.
Pbl
CRP No. 3224 of 2023 and CMP No. 19889 of 2023
13.12.2023
4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the order of the Executing Court passed without hearing the petitioner ought to be set aside?
Whether the petitioners prayer for restoration of possession to be granted.
R.Sathya
Periyasamy
Venkatachalam
Jayakodi
T.V.Thamilselvi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
