Allowed

Rajammal, v. Yesudasan

Madras HC5 Sept 2023CRP(MD)/1986/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench disposed of a Civil Revision Petition challenging an order in execution proceedings. Upholding the claimant's raised that the land included machinery not covered by the sale description. The Court allowed removal of the well and motor from the property description and granted the decree holder liberty to sue separately for ownership claims.

What did the court decide?

Claim raised in respect of Well and Motor connection in S.C.No.242 upheld; removed from property description. Liberty granted to decree holder to pursue rights via separate suit.

Rajammal, Vs Yesudasan — Execution and Attachment | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

C.R.P.(MD)No.1986 of 2019

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 05.09.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

¶6

C.R.P.(MD)No.1986 of 2019 and C.M.P.(MD)No.10241 of 2019

¶7

Rajammal ... Petitioner / Petitioner (Claimant)/

¶8

3^rd Party / 3^rd Party

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.Yesudasan ... 1^st Respondent / 1^st Respondent/ Petitioner (Decree holder)/Plaintiff 2.Anbalagan ... 2^nd Respondent/2^nd Respondent / Respondent (Judgment Debtor)/ Defendant

¶11

Prayer: This Civil Revision Petition is filed 115 of the Civil Procedure

¶12

Code, against the fair order and decretal order, dated 05.09.2019, made

¶13

in E.A.No.80 of 2019, in E.P.No.64 of 2015, on the file of the Sub Court, Uthamapalayam, in O.S.No.84 of 2010, on the filed of the Sub

¶14

Court, Padmanabhapuram.

¶15

For Petitioners : Mr.K.Guhan

¶16

For Respondents : Mr.C.Dhanaseelan for R1 : No appearance for R2

¶17

1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶18

C.R.P.(MD)No.1986 of 2019

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The instant Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the order, dated 05.09.2019, made in E.A.No.80 of 2019, in E.P.No.64 of 2015, on the file of the Sub Court, Uthamapalayam, in O.S.No.84 of 2010, on the filed of the Sub Court, Padmanabhapuram.

¶21

The very Revision Petition has been filed by the third party, who is the mother of the judgment debtor, viz., one Anbalagan. It appears from the records that the plaintiff has filed the suit for recovery of money, before the Sub Court, Padmanabhapuram and obtained a decree on 03.02.2011. Subsequent to the decree, the sale was transmitted to the Uthamapalayam Sub Court and an execution application has been filed in E.P.No.64 of 2015, in respect of second item of property situated in S.F.Nos.1161, 1168/3, 1180 and 1181 of Uthamapuram village.

¶22

During the pendency of the said Execution Petition, the

¶23

third party, viz., Rajammal,who is the mother of the judgment debtor and the second respondent / Anbalagan filed application under Order 21

¶24

2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

C.R.P.(MD)No.1986 of 2019

¶26

Rule 58 C.P.C raising a claim in respect of the Well and Pumpsets situated in S.F.No.1181. In order to understand the whole gamut of issue, this Court deems it appropriate to extract the relevant objection raised by the third party claim. The same is found a place in Para No.4 of the affidavit in E.A.No.80 of 2019. The same reads as follows:

¶27

“ ,e;epiyapy; fpisk;jhuh; jd;iftrk; irj;J mDgtpj;J tUfpd;w kDr; nrhj;jhdJ cj;jkGuk; fpuhkk;> rh;Nt vz;.1181-y; 1 Vf;fh; 22 nrz;by; Nky;gf;fk; 98 nrz;bw;F neLNtyp kzy;fhL tl;lj;jpy; gioa gl;lh vz;. 530-f;F Gjpa gl;lh vz;.1768 Mf cs;sJ. fpisk;jhuUf;F nrhe;jkhd Nkw;gb kDr;nrhj;jpy; njd;Nkw;F %iyapy; fpisk;jhuNu jdJ nrhe;j nrytpy; fpzW mikj;J> kpd; ,izg;G S.C.No.242 ngw;W mjpy; 7 ½ HP kpd;Nkhl;lhh;> gk;Gnrl;L kw;Wk; cgfuzq;fis mikj;J> fpisk;jhuh; kl;LNk jdpj;J ghj;jpakhfp> mDgtpj;J tUfpwhh;.“

¶28

At this juncture, the learned counsel for the decree holder / first respondent herein has fairly conceded the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, and would submit that they are only interested in the property situated in S.No.1180 to an extent of 74 cents and S.No.1181 of an extent of 24 cents and the total extent is 98 cents

¶29

in Uthamapuram village, and the alleged Well and Pump sets connection in S.C.No.242 could be excluded from the description of

¶30

3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

C.R.P.(MD)No.1986 of 2019

¶32

property.

¶33

The submissions made by the learned counsel for the decree holder / first respondent herein is recorded. In view of the above submission, this Court is of the firm view that the finding of the trial Court is liable to be interfered with. Hence, the claim in respect of the Well and Motor connection in S.C.No.242 is upheld and the same is ordered to be removed from the description of the property.

¶34

It is made clear that the item No.2 of the execution petition is only the land in S.F.No.1180 of an extent of 74 cents and in S.F.No. 1181 of an extent of 24 cents, totally of an extend of 98 cents in Uthapuram Village.

¶35

At this juncture, the learned counsel for the decree holder/ first respondent herein would submit that they conceded the submission only in respect of this E.P, and he may be given liberty to adjudicate in a suit separately instituted by the petitioner herein, in respect of the disputed claim of Well and the Motor connection.

¶36

4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶37

C.R.P.(MD)No.1986 of 2019

¶38

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel

¶39

for the decree holder, this Court gives liberty to the decree holder to adjudicate his right over the Well and Motor connection in a suit instituted by the petitioner herein in O.S.No.149 of 2019 on the file of the Sub Court, Uthamapalayam.

¶40

The instant Civil Revision Petition stands disposed of as indicated above. There shall be no order as to cost. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶41

05.09.2023

¶42

NCC : Yes/No Index :Yes/No Ls To

¶43

1.The Sub Court, Padmanabhapuram.

¶44

2.The Sub Court, Uthamapalayam.

¶45

3.The Section Officer, VR Section,

¶46

5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶47

C.R.P.(MD)No.1986 of 2019

¶48

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶49

6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶50

C.R.P.(MD)No.1986 of 2019

¶51

C.KUMARAPPAN.,J.

¶52

¶53

Order made in C.R.P(MD)No.1986 of 2019

¶54

05.09.2023

¶55

7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Rajammal, v. Yesudasan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajammal, v. Yesudasan

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

R.Vijayalakshmi, Vs S.Mohammed Bilal, Rep.by His

J.Pelavendran(Died) Vs George

Kannan Vs Nallusamy

Annakodi, Vs Sekar

Namachivayam (Died), M. Rajeswari, Vs Chinnadurai (Died), 1. Rajarathinam Pillai

The Deputy Registrar of Vs D.Imayavaramban