R SARAVANAN Vs. PAVATHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner/appellant/respondent has preferred the present revision in Crl. R.C. No. 146 of 2009 against the judgment passed in C.A. No. 117 of 2008, on the file of Additional District Court-cum-Fast Track Court-I, Erode, dated 19.11.2008 against Crl. M.P. No. 729 of 2007 on the file of District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Kodumudi, Erode District, 28.1.2008. The short facts of the case are as follows:

(2.) The respondent in his counter had submitted that he is an agriculturist and that he had taken a loan of Rs. 20,000/- from the Proprietor of Murugan Rice Mill, Ganapathypalayam and had also taken a loan from the Primary Agricultural Co-operative Bank and conducting agricultural business. He submitted that he had incurred a loss in the agriculture business. He had submitted that the petitioner in order to usurp the property of the respondent in order to hand it over to her daughter, is functioning in a vindictive manner. He submitted that the petitioner had sold the land in Survey No. 281, an extent of 47 cents and given the sale consideration of Rs. 61,900/- obtained to her daughter. He had also submitted that the petitioner had given a complaint against him at the police station and the said case is pending. It was submitted that the respondent finds it difficult to maintain himself. It was submitted that as he had objected to filing of complaint by the petitioner and had asked to set-aside the said complaint, the petitioner had filed the present petition. He had prayed for dismissal of the petition.

(3.) The trial Court, after perusal of the oral and documentary evidence allowed the said petition and directed the respondent to allot a portion in his house to enable the petitioner to reside there and that the respondent should take care of all her necessities. It was further ordered that the respondent does not have any right to send her out of the house which is a joint property.