KANAKAMMA Vs. KAMALAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE decree holder in O.S. No. 121 of 1986 on the file of the District Munsif s Court, Kuzhithurai, is the revision petitioner. She obtained a decree against the respondent herein on 25.9.1989 for declaration and injunction restraining her from entering the suit property and putting up any construction or building. She filed E.P. No. 124 of 1990 under Order 21, Rule 32 of the Code of Civil Procedure alleging that the respondent in defiance of the decree against her committed trespass upon the suit property and put up a shed and a building and she had to be therefore removed from the property, the construction demolished and the respondent arrested. THE respondent could not be served and therefore paper publication was effected; she was called absent; set ex parte and delivery was ordered after demolition on 7.12.1992. THE delivery was to be effected by 7.1.1993. THE delivery was also effected as per the direction of the Court on 18.12.1992.

(2.) THEREAFTER, the decree holder/revision petitioner filed a fresh execution petition in E.P. No. 120 of 1995 alleging that the respondent, after the decree had been executed on 24.2.1995 in violation of the decree, entered the property once again and put up a second shed and the same had to be removed, if necessary, with police help. The application was filed under Order 21, Rule 32 (5) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(3.) THE respondent, though served, has not chosen to appear and contest the civil revision petition.