T S RAMACHANDRAN MARTHANDAN Vs. R BASHEERUDDIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by the order in E.A.No.56 of 99 in E.P.No.61 of 98 in O.S.No.665 of 87 on the file of District Munsif, Tambaram, the judgment-debtor has filed the above revision before this Court.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner before the Executing Court is as follows:- THE petitioner is a tenant in respect of building at No.31, Pillayarkoil St, Pallavaram, Madras-44 and in order to establish his case, he had filed not less than 52 documents. It is stated that he had established before the Executing Court that the machinery in the premises belong exclusively to him and over which the plaintiff has no right at all. THE Executing Court had dismissed the application holding that the application is barred by principles of constructive resjudicata. It is further stated that the petitioner had an opportunity to defend his suit and when he had failed to do so, according to the Court below, he is precluded from raising the objection. It is also stated that participation or otherwise in a proceeding, lacking in jurisdiction, would not confer powers on the Court to assume jurisdiction, when the Civil Court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter and the powers are conferred only upon the Rent Controller, the participation of the petitioner herein in those proceedings has any relevance. He could resis the execution of the decree at the time of execution or even in a collateral proceedings. THE learned District Munsif did not even bother to scrtunise his case independently, but had chosen to confine himself with the decree. THE approach of the learned Judge is irregular. It is also stated that the Civil Judge at Tambaram has no jurisdiction to entertain the execution proceedings pursuant to the notification and orders issued by the Government. THE Court at Tambaram ceases to have jurisdiction and the matter is entrusted with the District Munsif Court at Alandur (Saidapet). THErefore, the entertaining of the execution proceedings itself by the Munsif Court at Tambaram is against the specific notification of this Court. In the absence of territorial jurisdiction, the proceedings of the Court below are liable to be set at naught.

(3.) MR. B.T.Seshadri, learned counsel for the respondent, after taking me through the entire earlier proceedings commencing from the relief prayed for the suit and ending with the order passed by the Apex Court, would contend that in asmuchas the petitioner had become a tenant in respect of the land, building, machineries, furniture, and other accessories, the suit filed by the plaintiff before the Civil Court is maintainable and the Civil Court alone has jurisdiction and the same has been rightly decreed. He also contented that the District Munsif'sCourt at Tambaram alone has got jurisdiction; accordingly the execution petition laid before the said Court is maintainable.