PAZHANIYAPPA ROUNDER Vs. MARUTHACHALAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petition is at the instance of first judgment debtor /1 st petitioner in E. A No. 261/95 in E. P. No. 224/98 in O. S. No. 442/82 before the Sub Court Palakkad. THE E. A. "was Tiled stopping the execution proceedings on the ground that the decree was not executable and the quantum of profit has to be determine in final decree proceedings. THE E. A. was dismissed by the execution Court on the ground that the decree was in conformity with the judgment and therefore, the e. A. is not maintainable.

(2.) WHEN the revision petition came up for arguments, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the revision is only to be dismissed, but this Court may clarify that the direction given by the trial court that the quantum of mesne profits is left open to be estimated in the execution proceedings under O. XX R. 12 of the Code of Civil procedure is not correct. The wording of O. XX R. 12 of the C. P. C. would show that the procedure to be followed is to pass a preliminary and then a final decree under O. XX R. 12 (ii) quantifying the rent or mesne profits, as the case may be.