Legal heirs of a plaintiff without any decree in his favour sought execution of a specific performance decree. Subsequent purchasers succeeded under Section 47 CPC, and the High Court upheld that order and dismissed the revision.
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. 5026 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 01-07-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI
CRP No. 5026 of 2023
1. B. Vasanthi
D/o. Late Belli Gowder, Aravenue, Kothagiri Taluk, Nilgiri District.
2. Anandhi
W/o. Kalaiselvan at shakthi Nagar, Veerapandi, Coimbatore-641 047.
Petitioners
Vs
S/o. Late P.Narayanasamy, Karamadai, Mettupalayam Taluk, Coibatore.
2.B.R.Mohan Kumar
S/o. D.Rangasamy, D.No.7/222, Periya Ranganathapuram, Bujankanur, Post, Kallampalayam Village, Mettupalayam Taluk, Coimbatore. B.Belligowder (Deceased)
3.B.Balakrishnan
S/o. Late Belligowder, D.No.14/142, Aravenu, Kothagiri, S.A Shanmugham(Deceased)) S.A.Saravanan (Deceased)
CRP No. 5026 of 2023
4.S.A.Leelakrishnan
S/o. Ayyaswamy, No.13/12-B, Diwan Bhagadur Road, R.S. Puram, Coimbatore-641 002.
5.S.Krishnaveni
W/o. S.A.Saravanan, No.13/121B, Diwan Bhagadur Road, R.S.Puram. Coimbatore-641 002.
6.S.Manojkumar
S/o. S.A.Saravanan, No.13/121B, Diwan Bhagadur Road, R.S.Puram. Coimbatore-641 002.
7.S.Krithika
D/o. S.A.Saravanan, No.13/121B, Diwan Bhagadur Road, R.S.Puram. Coimbatore-641 002.
8.B.Manoharah
S/o. Late Belligowder, No.14/142, Sakkattha, Kotagiri Taluk, Nilgiri District.
9.B.Jayakumar
S/o. Late Belligowder, No.14/143, Sakkattha, Kotagiri Taluk, Nilgiri District.
10.B.Mahesh
S/o. Late Belligowder, No.14/142, Sakkattha, Kotagiri Taluk, Nilgiri District.
CRP No. 5026 of 2023
11.B.Saroja
D/o. Late Belligowder, No.14/142, Sakkattha, Kotagiri Taluk, Nilgiri District.
12.Nirmala
W/o. S.A Shanmugam, D.No.305, TV Road, R.S. Puram, Coimbatore.
13.Suganya D/o. S.A Shanmugam, D.No.305, TV Road, R.S. Puram, Coimbatore.
14.Nithya D/o. S.A Shanmugam, D.No.305, TV Road, R.S. Puram, Coimbatore.
Respondents
PRAYER This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code praying to set aside the fair and decreetal order passed in EA.No.452/2008 in EP.No.9/2011 on the file of Honourable IInd Additional Subordinate Judge Coimbatore.
For Petitioners: M/s.Dinuprashanth
For Respondents: Mr.N. Manokaran
ORDER
The decree holders, who are claiming under one Belli Gowder, the 4th
plaintiff in a suit for specific performance, are the revision petitioners,
CRP No. 5026 of 2023
challenging the order of the Execution Court, allowing the application under
Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure and consequently dismissing the
execution petition
the 4th plaintiff in the suit and the suit came to be decreed on 2nd September
1985, against which an appeal was also preferred before this Court in A.S. No. 736 of 1986, and the Hon'ble Division Bench, vide judgment dated 18.06.2003,
dismissed the appeal preferred at the instance of defendants 2 and 3. According
to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the 4th plaintiff's right remained intact,
and in order to execute the decree, the 4th decree holder filed the execution petition in E.P. No. 9 of 2011. At the stage of execution of the draft sale deed as directed by the Court, an application was taken out by the subsequent purchasers, who sought dismissal of the execution petition as one not being executable, invoking the provisions of Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
CRP No. 5026 of 2023
no subsisting interest in the subject property or the decree, and accordingly proceeded to allow the application under Section 47 and dismissed the execution petition. Aggrieved by the same, the present revision petition has been preferred.
states that subsequent to the decree passed by the Trial Court in O.S. No. 11 of 1983 dated 02.09.1985 and the dismissal of A.S. No. 736 of 1986, the plaintiffs
1 to 3, along with defendants 1 to 3, executed a registered General Power of Attorney, based on which the property was conveyed to respondents 1 and 2
herein through two registered sale deeds. It is further contended that the property was subsequently plotted out and a gift deed was also executed in favour of the Panchayat and plots have been sold. As on date, the respondents 1
and 2 have no subsisting interest in the suit property. He would further state that
the present execution is only an attempt to blackmail respondents 1 and 2 to
make some quite money in the process.
CRP No. 5026 of 2023
counsel on either side and also gone through the order of the Executing Court allowing the Section 47 application and consequently dismissing the execution petition.
7.In the suit in O.S. No. 11 of 1983 filed before the Sub Court,
Coimbatore for specific performance, one of the plaintiffs, who was shown as a minor, was represented by Belli Gowder, who was arrayed as the 4th plaintiff in
the said suit. However, though a decree came to be passed, there was no decree against or in favour of the 4th plaintiff, Belli Gowder. Subsequently, the decree was challenged by defendants 2 and 3 alone before the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court, and by its judgement dated 18.06.2003, the appeal was also dismissed.
8.It is the specific case of respondents 1 and 2 that, subsequent to the dismissal of the first appeal by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court,
plaintiffs 1 to 3, vide Exs. P1 to P3, executed registered General Powers of
CRP No. 5026 of 2023
Attorney in favour of one Jeevanantham. At the same time, defendants 1 to 3 also executed a registered Power of Attorney under Ex.P4 in favour of the same agent, Jeevanantham, who, in turn, conveyed the subject properties to respondents 1 and 2 by way of registered sale deeds marked as Exs. P7 and P8.
this regard are marked as Exs. P5 and P6. The Court has also gone through the decree passed in the suit, as well as the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench
of this Court, dismissing the appeal. There is no decree in favour of the 4th plaintiff, Belli Gowder. Subsequent to the demise of Belli Gowder, the petitioners, claiming to be his legal heirs, have sought to execute the decree in O.S. No. 11 of 1983. The said execution petition has been filed not only against
the judgment debtors, but also against the plaintiffs.
respondents 1 and 2 filed an application under Section 47 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, questioning the execution of the decree. The Execution Court, after
CRP No. 5026 of 2023
elaborately discussing the rival contentions of the parties, found that Belli
Gowder, the 4th plaintiff, did not have a decree in his favour, and therefore, the
same could not be executed before the Execution Court.
plaintiff, had already conveyed their interest through their General Power of Attorney agent, one Jeevanantham, in favour of respondents 1 and 2—by the judgment debtors on 28.07.2009 and by plaintiffs 1 to 3 on 09.04.2010. The property was purchased as early as on 28.04.2010. Therefore, the application under Section 47 was rightly taken out, as the decree cannot be executed at the instance of the legal heirs of Belli Gowder, who had no decree granted in his
favour. I do not find any error, perversity, or infirmity in the findings of the Executing Court in allowing the application under Section 47 filed by respondents 1 and 2. There is no merit in the Civil Revision Petition, and it is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
01-07-2025
jrs
Index:Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
CRP No. 5026 of 2023
Internet:Yes
Neutral Citation:Yes/No To
2.N. Purushothaman S/o. Late P.Narayanasamy, Karamadai, Mettupalayam Taluk, Coibatore.
3.B.R.Mohan Kumar
S/o. D.Rangasamy, D.No.7/222, Periya Ranganathapuram, Bujankanur, Post, Kallampalayam Village, Mettupalayam Taluk, Coimbatore. B.Belligowder (Deceased)
4.B.Balakrishnan
S/o. Late Belligowder, D.No.14/142, Aravenu, Kothagiri, S.A Shanmugham(Deceased)) S.A.Saravanan (Deceased)
5.S.A.Leelakrishnan
S/o. Ayyaswamy, No.13/12-B, Diwan Bhagadur Road, R.S. Puram, Coimbatore-641 002.
6.S.Krishnaveni
W/o. S.A.Saravanan, No.13/121B, Diwan Bhagadur Road, R.S.Puram. Coimbatore-641 002.
7.S.Manojkumar
S/o. S.A.Saravanan, No.13/121B, Diwan Bhagadur Road, R.S.Puram.
CRP No. 5026 of 2023
Coimbatore-641 002.
8.S.Krithika
D/o. S.A.Saravanan, No.13/121B, Diwan Bhagadur Road, R.S.Puram. Coimbatore-641 002.
9.B.Manoharah
S/o. Late Belligowder, No.14/142, Sakkattha, Kotagiri Taluk, Nilgiri District.
10. B.Jayakumar
S/o. Late Belligowder, No.14/143, Sakkattha, Kotagiri Taluk, Nilgiri District.
11.B.Mahesh
S/o. Late Belligowder, No.14/142, Sakkattha, Kotagiri Taluk, Nilgiri District.
12.B.Saroja
D/o. Late Belligowder, No.14/142, Sakkattha, Kotagiri Taluk, Nilgiri District.
13.Nirmala
W/o. S.A Shanmugam, D.No.305, TV Road, R.S. Puram, Coimbatore.
14.Suganya
D/o. S.A Shanmugam, D.No.305, TV Road, R.S. Puram, Coimbatore.
CRP No. 5026 of 2023
15.Nithya
D/o. S.A Shanmugam, D.No.305, TV Road, R.S. Puram, Coimbatore.
CRP No. 5026 of 2023
P.B.BALAJI J.
jrs
CRP No. 5026 of 2023
01-07-2025
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a person who was a plaintiff but had no decree in his favour could execute the decree through his legal heirs?
Whether the Executing Court rightly allowed the Section 47 application by subsequent purchasers and dismissed the execution petition?
2 provisions across 1 enactments
B. Vasanthi
Anandhi
N. Purushothaman
B.R. Mohan Kumar
B. Balakrishnan
S.A. Leelakrishnan
P.B. Balaji
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
