Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.B.BALAJI
M.M. Babu – Appellant
Versus
Young Men Christian Association, Represented by their General Secretary P. Asir Pandian – Respondent
ORDER :
P.B.BALAJI, J.
The revision petitioner is an obstructor, who filed an application under Order XXI Rule 99 of CPC, claiming to be a bonafide tenant and not being a party to the proceedings before the Rent Controller. The said application has been dismissed at the SR stage, holding that the application is not maintainable. Challenging the same, the present revision petition has been filed.
2. I have heard Mr.R.Abdul Mubeen, for Mr.P.D.Selvaraj, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Mr.V.R.Thangavelu, learned counsel for the 1st respondent.
3. Mr.R.Abdul Mubeen, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner would submit that the original tenants under the 1st respondent were carrying on business under the name and style of New Ramakrishna Lunch Home under the 1st respondent, as a tenant. He would further contend that the rent control proceedings were initiated against the erstwhile predecessors in interest of the revision petitioner and eviction came to be ordered in RCOP.No.1299 of 2018. Execution petition in E.P.No.275 of 2021 was filed by the 1st respondent. The petitioner obstructed to the execution and therefore, the 1st respondent took out an application in
A party dispossessed after contesting execution cannot invoke Order XXI Rule 99 if they retained an opportunity to object under Rule 97, marking them effectively as a judgment debtor.
Petitioner was in possession and could not invoke Order XXI Rule 99 without having been dispossessed; application found non-maintainable due to lack of independent rights under existing legal provisi....
A third party claiming under a judgment debtor cannot file an application under Order XXI Rule 97; they must file under Rule 99 instead.
A pendente lite purchaser lacks standing to obstruct execution under Order XXI Rule 97 CPC, as their claims do not establish independent rights against a decree.
A person claiming independent right, title or interest in the property can resist delivery of possession even by filing an objection under Order 21 Rule 97 CPC in the executing court itself and if th....
The executing court is competent to consider all questions raised by the persons offering obstruction against execution of the decree and pass appropriate order, which is to be treated as a decree. T....
The court reinforced that obstruction claims in execution proceedings must be heard to uphold rights, ensuring adherence to natural justice principles.
Joint tenants cannot be dispossessed without due process, and their rights devolve upon the death of the original tenant.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
