THIRU JAGADEESAN Vs. THIRU N SUBRAMANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The first Defendant in O.S. No. 546 of 1994, and the obstructor are the Appellants herein.

(2.) The Respondent filed the above suit against the first Appellant and Sub Registrar, Tiruvallur, for mandatory injunction directing the first Appellant to handover vacant possession of plaint 'A' schedule property and for permanent injunction, restraining the Sub Registrar/Tiruvallur, the second Appellant from registering the plaint 'B' property in favour of any third party. That suit was decreed on 13.12.2002.

(3.) Thereafter, the Respondent-decree holder filed execution petition in E.P. No. 50 of 2003, to execute the decree and at that time, the second Appellant caused obstruction in executing the decree and claimed title over the suit property. Therefore, the Respondent-decree holder filed E.A. No. 605 of 2004, under Order 21, Rule 97 of Code of Civil Procedure, to remove the obstructor viz., the second Appellant and that application in E.P. No. 605 of 2004, was dismissed and consequently E.P. No. 50 of 2003, was also dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, the Respondent-decree holder filed an appeal in C.M.A. No. 24 of 2008, against the dismissal of E.A. No. 605 of 2004 and that appeal was allowed and against the same, this C.M.S.A. was filed by the Appellants.