The Execution Court is not empowered to adjudicate the disputes or issues raised between the parties in the suit or reconsider the issues or otherwise.

C.R.P.No.80 of 2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 11.01.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

C.R.P.No.80 of 2023

and

C.M.P.No.590 of 2023

J.Banu

...

Petitioner

Vs

Md.Kalleemullah

...

Respondent

Prayer: This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the

Constitution of India to allow this Civil Revision Petition by setting aside the

impugned order and decretal order dated 26.10.2022 made in E.P.No.648 of

2022 on the file of X Assistant City Civil Court at Chennai.

For Petitioners

:

Mr.B.Ramamoorthy

1/6

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

C.R.P.No.80 of 2023

ORDER

The Civil Revision petition has been instituted challenging the

impugned order and decretal order dated 26.10.2022, passed in E.P. No.648

of 2022, in O.S. No.7519 of 2012. The revision petitioner is the defendant

in the suit and judgement debtor.

2. The respondent is the plaintiff who instituted a suit for specific

performance. It is not in dispute that the suit was decreed on 09.02.2017

itself. The respondent/decree holder filed E.P. No.648 of 2022 for execution

of the Decree passed in O.S. No.7519 of 2012. The Execution Court

adjudicated the issues and considered the objections raised by the revision

petitioner. The objections mainly raised by the judgement debtor is that

though the decree holder has filed E.P. No3406 of 2017 for the execution of

sale deed earlier, the decree holder has not registered the sale deed and on

that ground, the execution proceeding is to be dismissed. The judgement

debtor further raised the ground that the schedule of property mentioned in

2/6

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

C.R.P.No.80 of 2023

the execution petition differs from the decree passed in the suit. Both the

contentions raised on behalf of the judgement debtor are considered by the

Execution Court and the findings of the Execution Court reveal that the

respondent/decree holder has filed the copy of the registered sale deed dated

08.01.2020, which was executed in favour of the decree-holder by the Court

concerned.

3. On verification and on perusal of the sale deed registered by the

Court, it was found that the said sale deed was duly registered at the office

of the Sub-Registrar, Purasaivakkam in Document No.655 of 2020. The

decree-holder had produced the encumbrance certificate. On verification, the

execution of sale-deed and registration of sale-deed in favour of the decree-

holder finds a place in the encumbrance certificate also. The difference in

schedule of property in a decree and execution proceeding were also verified

by the Execution Court and were found to be incorrect. Thus, the Execution

Court formed an opinion that the objections raised by the judgement debtor

is only to protract the proceedings and accordingly, allowed the execution

3/6

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

C.R.P.No.80 of 2023

proceedings filed by the respondent/decree holder and ordered to deliver

vacant possession of the schedule property through the Court to decree-

holder, by 28.11.2022.

4. The scope of the execution proceeding cannot be expanded for the

purpose of adjudicating the issues raised in the suit between the parties.

Once, the decree became final in execution proceedings, Execution Court

has to consider whether there is any impediment for execution under section

47 of CPC. Therefore, the Execution Court is not empowered to adjudicate

the disputes or issues raised between the parties in the suit or reconsider the

issues or otherwise. In the present case, the judgement debtor raised two

doubts regarding the sale deed registered pursuant to the decree passed in

the suit, and both the grounds were considered and rejected by the Trial

Court which is in consonance with the facts and circumstances and there is

no perversity in respect of the findings in this regard.

4/6

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

C.R.P.No.80 of 2023

5. The Execution Court has already dir