NACHAYEE AMMAL Vs. PICHAIMUTHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners obtained a decree for delivery of possession in O.S. No. 419 of 1988. The decree was passed ex parte on 6-7-1990. The respondent applied for setting aside the ex parte decree on 31-7-1990. When that application was pending, the respondent had not obtained any order of stay. The decree-holders/plaintiffs applied for delivery of possession in the Executing Court and an order was passed on 3-12-1990 that delivery should be effected on or before 3-1-1991. The matter was posted on 7-1-1991 for final orders. On that date, the delivery effected by the Amin was recorded by the court and the execution petition was closed.

(2.) The application filed by the respondent for setting aside the ex parte decree was dismissed on 7-2-1991. It is stated that an appeal has been filed against that order and it is pending as C.M.A. No. 9 of 1991 on the file of the Sub Court, Karur. It is stated to be posted on 26-11-1991.

(3.) After the delivery was recorded, the respondent filed an application for stay of execution proceedings. But, that application was dismissed as delivery had been affected already. The respondent filed E.A. No. 165 of 1991 for setting aside the order dated 7-1-1991 passed by the executing Court. Several grounds are urged by the respondent. But, the executing Court accepted one of the grounds, viz., delivery of possession was ordered by the Executing Court without notice to the respondent and, therefore, it was not proper and it was not in accordance with a Circular issued by this Court in R.O.C. No. 195/76 Con. RR2 dated 22-11-1977.