C.R.P.No.3548 of 2023

C.R.P. No. 3548 of 2023

T.V.THAMILSELVI

Today, this matter is taken up for hearing under the caption “For

clarification” at the instance of learned counsel respondent caveator.

2. On considering both side submissions, the earlier order passed by

this court dated 30.10.2023 in the above Civil Revision Petition is reopened

and the same is modified as follows :-

O R D E R

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed to set aside the

docket order dated 21.06.2023 passed by XIV Small Causes

Court at Chennai in E.A.No.4 of 2023 in E.P.No.241 of 2020 on

the file of XIV Small Causes Court at Chennai.

2. Before the executing Court, as a landlord, she

filed a petition in R.C.O.P.No.1549 of 2010 for the relief of

eviction against the respondents/tenants and the eviction was

1/8

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

C.R.P.No.3548 of 2023

ordered. Subsequently, to execute the said order, the decree

holder initiated execution proceedings in E.P.No.241 of 2020

before the XIV Court of Small Causes, Chennai, in which the

respondents/tenants appeared and filed an application in

E.A.No.4 of 2023 by invoking Section 47 r/w 151 CPC, praying

to set aside the order passed in E.P.No.241 of 2010. That

application was strongly objected by the decree holder stating

that at an earlier occasion, the judgement debtors, who are father-

in-law and son-in-law, have filed an application in E.A.No.1 of

2020 by invoking Section 47 CPC, for the same prayer rejecting

the E.P.No.241 of 2020, that application was dismissed by the

Executing Court on merits. Challenging the said order, they have

filed a Civil Revision Petition in C.R.P.No.889 of 2021 and on

hearing both sides, this Court dismissed the petition by imposing

cost of Rs.10,000/-. The said cost was paid. Thereafter, the

executing Court proceeded with the E.P and ordered for delivery

on 13.02.2023. Again, another judgement debtor filed the

aforesaid application under Section 47 CPC to set aside the

2/8

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

C.R.P.No.3548 of 2023

execution proceedings. But, though the executing Court taken the

application on file, adjourning the same on various dates and the

same is pending without any progress. Aggrieved over the same,

the Revision Petitioner preferred this Civil Revision Petition.

3. The learned counsel for Respondent would submit

that before the Rent Controller, he filed an application in

E.A.No.4 of 2023 under Sec.47 of C.P.C. stating that there is lot

of illegalities in the decree. Hence, he raised objection to execute

the decree. Though the earlier application filed under Sec.47 of

C.P.C. was dismissed with cost, again he filed another

application in E.A.No.4 of 2023 before the Executing Court to

reject the petition in E.P.No. 241 of 2020. Having taken the

application on file and the Executing Court adjourning the matter

on various dates. Aggrieved over the same, the decree holder

preferred this Revision Petitioner stating that already by invoking

Sec.47 of C.P.C., the respondent filed a petition to reject the

petition in E.P. No. 241 of 2020 and the same was dismissed by

3/8

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

C.R.P.No.3548 of 2023

the Executing Court by imposing cost, but again the respondent

filed another application on placing same ground in E.A.No.4 of

2023.

4. Records perused. On perusal of records, the respondent

now preferred an application under Sec.47 of C.P.C. in E.A.No.4

of 2023. In fact, the respondents in E.P. are the judgement

debtors, who are father-in-law and son-in-law and they have

made all sort of hindrance to the decree holder as per the decree

passed in E.P.No.241 of 2020. The learned counsel for

respondent raised objections stating that in the Execution Petition

filed by the Revision Petitioner, there is lack of particulars and

the signature of decree older also not proper. Therefore, he rais