P PALANIAPPAN Vs. THIRUPURAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is filed against the order of the lower Court in E.A. No. 2936 of 1982 allowing the petition filed under S. 47, C.P.C.

(2.) ONE Gurusamy and his mother Kannammal filed the suit in O.S. No. 4025 of 1968 on the file of the I Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Madras, against Ponniah, father of their respondent herein and the Executive Officer, Prasanna Vinayagar Koil Devasthanam, for declaration of their title and for recovery of possession of the house bearing old Door No. 75 and New Door No. 40 in R.S. No. 1208/1. assuring 1, 200 sq.ft. Ponniah, first defendant in the said suit remaind exparte and the suit was contested only by the second defendant Executive Officer, Prasanna Vinayagar Koil Devasthanam, On 22-6-1970, the trial court decreed the suit in O.S. No. 4025/68 and granted a decree for declaration and recovery of possession in favour of the plaintiffs Gurusamy and Kannammal. The said decree in O.S. No. 4025 of 1968 has become final. On 22-10-1979, the petitioner herein has purchased the property from Gurusamy, first plaintiff in the said suit and the legal representatives of Kannammal under a registered sale deed, marked as Ex. B. 1 in this case. After purchase under Ex. B. 1, the petitioner herein filed Ex. P. No. 1722 of 1980 against the respondent herein, who is the daughter of the said Ponnaiah for executing the decree and for taking possession of the suit property in O.S. No. 4025 of 1968 on the ground that under Ex. B. 1, he purchased the suit property. In the said execution petition, the respondent herein filed Ex. A. No. 2996 of 1982 under S. 47, C.P.C., for dismissal of the execution petition on the ground that the petitioner herein has not obtained, a valid assignment of the decree in O.S. No. 4025 of 1968 from the Plaintiffs in the suit, In E.A. No. 2936 of 1982, the respondent therein further contended that she is in possession of the house bearing old door No. 78-A and the new Door No. 43, which is not the subject matter of the decree in O.S. No. 4025/1968. The lower Court allowed E.A. No. 2936/1982 and dismissed E.P. No. 1722 of 1980 on the ground that the petitioner herein has not obtained the assignment of the decree in O.S. No. 4025 of 1968 from the plaintiffs in the said suit and on the further ground that there are some discrepancies in the description of the property given in the decree in O.S. No. 4025 of 1968 and the sale deed under Ex. B. 1. As against the order of the Lower Court, the petitioner has filed the present revision petition.