SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(Mad) 66

A.C.ARUMUGAPERUMAL ADITYAN
District Collector, Tiruvannamalai – Appellant
Versus
Jayaseelan – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
V. Srikanth Assistant Government Pleader, for Petitioners
S. Baskaran, for Respondent,

ORDER

The order passed in E.P. No. 69 of 1997 in O.S. No. 757 of 1995 on the file of the Court of Principal District Munsif, Vandavasi is under challenge in this revision.

2. The said Execution petition was filed under Order 21 Rule 22 and under Order 21 and Rule 35 C.P.C. The suit in O.S. No. 757 of 1995 was filed by the plaintiff for injunction restraining the defendants viz., The District Collector, Tiruvannamalai District, Tiruvannamalai, The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Vandavasi and The Special Tahsildar Natham Survey, Taluk Office, Vandavasi from issuing the patta for the plaint schedule property in favour of one Suseela Ammal, who is not a party to the suit and for mandatory injunction against the above defendants to grant patta in respect of the suit property in favour of the plaintiff. An ex parte decree was passed in the suit on 3.1.1997.

3. It is represented on behalf of the revision petitioners that unfortunately a petition filed to set aside the ex parte decree along with the condonation of delay application in I.A. No. 214 of 2000 in O.S. No. 757 of 1995 was dismissed. The plaintiff has filed E.P. No. 69 of 1997 to execute the decree.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the











Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top