Madras High Court
L.K.Annasamy vs M.Kalifullah on 24 July, 2015
Author: K.K.Sasidharan
Bench: K.K.Sasidharan
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 24.07.2015
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN
C.R.P.(NPD)(MD)No.1380 of 2015
L.K.Annasamy : Petitioner
Vs.
M.Kalifullah : Respondent
Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of Code of Civil
Procedure, to call for the records relating to the fair and decreetal order
dated 20 March 2013 made in E.P.No.20 of 2011 in R.C.O.P.No.14 of 2002 on the
file of the Principal District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Lalgudi and
set aside the same.
!For Petitioner : Mr.D.Rajkumar
^For Respondent : Mr.J.Anandhavalli
:ORDER
The petitioner filed R.C.O.P.No.14 of 2002 before the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Lalgudi and obtained an order of eviction. Thereafter, he filed E.P.No.20 of 2011 before the executing Court to execute the decree. The execution petition was dismissed on the ground that the petitioner is yet to receive the approved plan for demolition and reconstruction. The order dated 20 March 2013 is under challenge.
2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and respondent.
3.The learned counsel for respondent fairly submitted that he is not in possession of information with regard to the pendency of appeal preferred against the order in R.C.O.P.No.14 of 2002.
4.The petitioner armed with a decree in R.C.O.P.No.14 of 2002, filed an application for execution. It is not for the executing Court to say that the decree will be executed only after obtaining planning permission from the local authority. The duty of the trial Court is only to execute the decree. The question of production of building plan would arise only in case, the decree was conditional in nature and the trial Court has made it a condition precedent that the decree would be executed only in case approved building plan is produced. When there is no such condition, it is not open to the Court to prescribe its own condition to execute the decree. I am therefore of the view that the learned trial Judge was not correct in dismissing the application.
5.In the result, the order dated 20 March 2013 is set aside. The application in E.P.No.20 of 2011 is restored to file. The learned executing Judge is directed to issue notice to the respondent and ascertain as to whether any appeal is pending. In case, appeal is not pending, it is open to the learned executing Judge to proceed with the execution proceedings in accordance with law.
6.In the upshot, I allow the civil revision petition. No costs.
To The Principal District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Lalgudi. .