P A PAUL Vs. PRABHAKARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was served with two notices in E.P.No.31/2007 and E.A No.55/2007 purporting to be in execution of the decree in O.S No.60 of 2000 on the file of the court of the Munsiff of Punalur. The petitioner filed a detailed objection dated 28.03.2008 to the notices dated 28.09.2007 referred to above. The petitioner contended therein that he is not a party to the decree in O.S.No.60/2011 and that the property involved is the subject matter of O.S.No.245/2007 on the file of the same court. The execution court is yet to consider the objection filed by the petitioner to the notices in execution referred to above.

(2.) THE first respondent who is the decree holder in O.S.No.60/2000 thereafter sought the appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to put up a boundary along the decree schedule property. The same was allowed by order dated 11.01.2010 by the execution court and an attempt to review the same also failed. The orders passed in E.A.No.99/2009 and E.A.No.85/2010 in E.P.No.31/2007 in O.S No.60/2000 are under challenge in this original petition.

(3.) THE original petition is allowed. No costs.