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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 65181

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J
Mayavan (died) Jayavalli (died) – Appellant
Versus
Saravana Mudaliar Vadamalai Counder (died) – Respondent
Rev.Appl.No.208 of 2019|C.M.P.No.23392 of 2019|C.R.P.No.3062 of 2013|S.L.P.(C) No.32185 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Fr.Xavier Arulraj Senior Counsel for Mr.K.Balu for P1 and P3, Mr.R.Rajaraman for P2

The review application was dismissed as infructuous following the Supreme Court's clarification on property execution.

Headnote:The petitioners filed a review application under Section 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure to review a prior order dismissing their application under Section 47 CPC. The Supreme Court clarified the execution details regarding property Cadastre No.2373, leading to the dismissal of the current application as infructuous. Court concluded that nothing survives in the review application.

Table of Content
1. review application filed to clarify execution order. (Para 1 , 2)
2. supreme court's clarification on execution process. (Para 3)
3. review application dismissed as infructuous. (Para 4)

O R D E R

This Review Application has been filed to review the order dated

24.04.2019 in C.R.P.No.3062 of 2013, dismissing the revision filed as against the dismissal of the application filed under Section 47 of Code of Civil Procedure, by the Execution Court. While dismissing the revision, this Court has held that, when the boundaries have been clearly identified, the question of identity of property cannot be gone into in an application under Section 47 CPC and therefore, the decree holder is entitled for delivery of possession.

2.Now, the revision petitioner has come forward with this review application. Now, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in S.L.P.(C) No.32185 of 2025, by order dated 11.11.2025, has passed the following order :

“4.A perusal of the order passed by the Executing Court or even the Revisional Court does not indicate that the Execution Court has directed for delivery of possession in respect of the plot No.1853. Since the decree is in respect of the suit schedule property plot No.2373, it has to be executed in respect of the said plot only. With the above clarification, the Special Leave Petition stands disposed of.”

3.From the above order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it is clear that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has clarified the manner in which the execution has to be made in respect of suit schedule property Cadastre No.2373 wet land. In such view of the matter, nothing survives in this review application.

4.Therefore, this Review Application is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

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 Back to top