M.Gopalsamy vs S.Subbulakshmi on 4 December, 2020

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

M.Gopalsamy vs S.Subbulakshmi on 4 December, 2020

Bench: N.Seshasayee

                                                                       C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.959 of 2020


                            BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                               DATED: 04.12.2020

                                                     CORAM:

                              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE

                                         C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.959 of 2019
                                                     and
                                          C.M.P.(MD)No.6245 of 2020


                      1.M.Gopalsamy
                      2.G.Pandiselvi               ...Revision Petitioners/Petitioners/
                                                                Petitioners/Respondents/
                                                                       Third Party
                                                        vs.


                      S.Subbulakshmi               ... Respondent/Respondent
                                                          Respondent/Petitioner/Plaintiff

                      PRAYER: This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of the
                      Civil Procedure Code, to set aside the fair and final order dated
                      30.01.2020 made in E.A.No.65 of 2019 in E.A.No.54 of 2019 in
                      E.P.No.32 of 2018 in O.S.No.106 of 2012 on the file of the District
                      Munsif, Virudhunagar by allowing this Civil Revision Petition.


                                 For Petitioners   : Mr.P.Santhoshkumar

                                                     ORDER

The respondent herein has obtained a decree for recovery of property.

When she laid an execution petition in E.P.No.32 of 2018, the revision petitioner herein has filed E.A.No.54 of 2019 under Order 21 Rule 97 CPC obstructing delivery. In this, the revision petitioner has filed 1/4 http://www.judis.nic.in C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.959 of 2020 E.A.No.65 of 2019 for appointing a Commissioner to assess the value of the property to be delivered. This Petition came to be dismissed, which in this Court's opinion rightly so.

2. The reasons can be explained:

When a third party obstructs the execution of a decree under Order 21 Rule 97 CPC in essence obstructors seeks better title to the property than the one the decree holder has. When the Court decides the relating merit of the title of the decree holder and that of the third party -obstructors, in essence, if the third party obstructors convinces the Court that his better title under Order 21 Rule 97 C.P.C, he has his right declared over the property that he claimed right to, whether suspension of what the value of the property is. Value has nothing to do with the title of any of the third party obstructor.

3. In conclusion, this Court does not find any merit in this petition.

accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.




                                                                                 04.12.2020

                      Index         : Yes/No
                      Internet      : Yes/No
                      ta


                      2/4
http://www.judis.nic.in
                                                                     C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.959 of 2020




                      To

1.The Principal District Munsif, Karaikkudi,

2.The Section Officer, V.R.Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

3/4

http://www.judis.nic.in C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.959 of 2020 N.SESHASAYEE, J ta C.R.P.(MD)No.959 of 2020 04.12.2020 4/4 http://www.judis.nic.in

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madras High Court