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) 65393

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.B. Balaji, J
G.Thomai – Appellant
Versus
Jerom Immanuvel – Respondent
C.R.P.No.5459 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.J.Agni Selvaraju

Efficient execution of court orders requires timely proceedings as mandated by established statutes.

Headnote:In the context of Civil Revision Petition No.5459 of 2025, the petitioner, having been the successful bidder in a public auction and holding a sale certificate since October 2018, contended for the expedited resolution of possession delivery proceedings. The court referenced the precedent set in Rahul S.Shah v.Jinendra Kumar Gandhi ((2021) 6 SCC 418), emphasizing the necessity of concluding execution proceedings within six months. The court directed that the pending matters be resolved within eight weeks, in line with procedural fairness and statutory expectations.

Table of Content
1. successful bidder seeks delivery of possession. (Para 1 , 2)
2. timely execution of court orders mandated. (Para 3)
3. court orders expedited resolution in eight weeks. (Para 4)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 10.11.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI C.R.P.No.5459 of 2025 G.Thomai ... Petitioner Vs.

1.Jerom Immanuvel

2.Chinnappan Arokiadoss

3.Royappan ... Respondents Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of CPC, to direct the Sub-Court, Sankarapuram, for speedy disposal of the Application in E.A.No.2 of 2025 against E.A.No.1 of 2025 in E.P.No.102 of 2013 in O.S.No.29 of 2012, on the file of the Sub-Court at Sankarapuram, within stipulated time that may be fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.J.Agni Selvaraju ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner is the successful bidder in public auction. The Court has also confirmed the sale and issued a sale certificate to the petitioner way back in October 2018. The petitioner had filed E.A.No.30 of 2019 for delivery of possession, subsequent to being issued with the sale certificate. The proceedings were subsequently transferred to the file of Sub Court, Sankarapuram.

2.The grievance of the petitioner is that for the past six years, nothing has moved and despite having paid the entire amount and sale certificate also being issued way back in October 2018, the petitioner is suffering without being able to recover possession of the property purchased by him, that too in Court auction.

3.The Hon'ble Supreme Court has also held in Rahul S.Shah v.Jinendra Kumar Gandhi ((2021) 6 SCC 418), that all execution proceedings must be concluded within a period of six months.

4.Considering the limited scope of the revision petition and dispensing with notice to the respondents, the Executing Court is hereby directed to dispose of the pending Application in E.A.No.2 of 2025 against E.A.No.1 of 2025 in E.P.No.102 of 2013 in O.S.No.29 of 2012, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

No costs.

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