Execution delivery was effected in favour of petitioner and execution petition terminated. The revision against interim order was dismissed as infructuous; in the other revision, petitioner's contention that no appeal lies against Order 21 Rule 106 CPC dismissal was left for him to raise before the appellate court.
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.
C.R.P.(NPD).Nos.1409 and 1410 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 07.03.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR
C.R.P.(NPD).Nos.1409 and 1410 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 and 1 of 2015
N.Babu ... Petitioner (in both CRPs)
vs
P.Kannan
... Respondent (in both CRPs)
Prayer in C.R.P.(NPD).No.1409 of 2015: Civil Revision Petition is filed
under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to strike off the CMA No.7 of 2014 on the file of the learned 1st Additional Subordinate Judge, Villupuram.
Prayer in C.R.P.(NPD).No.1410 of 2015: Civil Revision Petition is filed
under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to set aside the Docket order in I.A.No.131 of 2014 in CMA No.7 of 2014 on the file of the learned 1st Additional Subordinate Judge, Villupuram.
1/6
C.R.P.(NPD).Nos.1409 and 1410 of 2015
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Suresh (in both CRPs) For Respondent : Not Ready in Notice (in both CRPs)
COMMON ORDER
The Civil Revision Petition in C.R.P.(NPD).No.1409 of 2015 has been filed by the petitioner seeking to strike off C.M.A.No.7 of 2014 filed by the respondent challenging the dismissal of the application filed by him under Order 21 Rule 106 of the Civil Procedure Code to set aside the exparte order dated 25.11.2013 passed in E.A.No.19 of 2013 in E.P.No.92 of 2011.
2/6
C.R.P.(NPD).Nos.1409 and 1410 of 2015
learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in execution petition delivery was effected in favour of the petitioner on 25.09.2014 and execution petition is also terminated. The said statement is recorded.
3/6
C.R.P.(NPD).Nos.1409 and 1410 of 2015
Court and parties are at liberty to agitate their rights before the 1st Additional
Subordinate Judge, Villupuram in C .M.A.No.7 of 2014 provided the said
appeal is still pending on its file.
7. With these observations, the civil revision petition in
C.R.P.(NPD).No.1409 of 2015 is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the
connected civil miscellaneous petitions are closed.
07.03.2024
Index : Yes / No Speaking order : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No dm
4/6
C.R.P.(NPD).Nos.1409 and 1410 of 2015
To
The 1 st Additional Subordinate Judge, Villupuram.
5/6
C.R.P.(NPD).Nos.1409 and 1410 of 2015
S.SOUNTHAR, J.
dm
C.R.P.(NPD).Nos.1409 and 1410 of 2015
07.03.2024
6/6
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the CMA challenging dismissal of an Order 21 Rule 106 CPC application should be struck off as no appeal lies?
Whether the CRP challenging an interim order in I.A.No.131 of 2014 survives after delivery and termination of execution petition?
2 provisions across 2 enactments
N.Babu
P.Kannan
S.Sounthar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
