T. SHANMUGAM Vs. KARUPPASAMY CHETTIAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Civil Revision Petition has been filed to set aside the order, dated 04.02.2015 made in CMA No.28 of 2011 on the file of the Additional District & Sessions Court, Dindigul by confirming the fair and decreetal order dated 20.06.2011 made in E.A. No.248 of 2011 in E.A. No.467 of 2007 in E.P. No.153 of 2001 in O.S. No. 1078 of 1982 on the file of the Sub Court, Palani and to allow the same.

(2.) A suit in O.S. No.10 of 1982 has been filed by one Late.Karuppasamy Chettiar for specific performance of agreement of sale, dated 20.03.1981 and for possession with Costs and the same was decreed against the defendants in the suit. Subsequently, after the demise of Late.Karuppasamy Chettiar, their legal heirs/R-1 & R-2 herein have filed a petition in E.P. No.153 of 2001 in O.S. No. 10 of 1982 and the same was allowed in favour of R-1 & R-2 herein/plaintiffs. The revision petitioner/objector/3rd party had filed an application in E.A. No. 249 of 2009 to declare the sale deed dated 06.04.2013 as null and void which was dismissed for default . To restore the E.A No. 249 of 2009 the petitioner/objector has filed a petition in E.A. No. 365 of 2010 and the same was also dismissed for default. To restore the E.A. No. 365 of 2010 in E.A. No. 30 of 2011 filed which was dismissed for default. To restore the E.A.No. 30 of 2011 in E.P.--167 of 2011 was filed. E.A. No. 167 of 2011 was filed to restore the E.A. No. 31 of 2011(stay petition) With that E.A. No. 169 of 2011 was filed to stay proceeding in E.A. No. 467 of 2001. It was also dismissed for default. To restore the E.A. No. 169 of 2011 in E.A. No. 248 of 2011 was filed and the same was dismissed. Against the dismissal order in E.A. No. 248 of 2011, an appeal in C.M.A. No. 28 of 2011 was filed before the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Dindigul and the same was dismissed on 04.02.2015 on merits. Against the order this revision has been filed.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner and the respondent Nos.1 & 2 and perused the material documents available on record.