RAMALINGAM Vs. SELVAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendants are the civil revision petitioners before this Court filed this petition by invoking jurisdiction under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India, for struck of the suit in O.S. No. 115 of 2011, on the file of the Sub-Court, Ariyalur.

(2.) The case of the petitioners/defendants 2 and 3 are that the first defendant had obtained a loan an amount of Rs.90,000.00 on 30.01.2003 for construction of house and for his family expenses from the second defendant in the suit in O.S. No. 115 of 2011 and executed a promissory note in favour of the second defendant on the said date. Since the first defendant has failed to discharge the loan with interest, the second defendant has filed a suit in O.S. No. 59 of 2004, on the file of the Sub-Court, Ariyalur for recovery of the amount with interest due on the said suit promissory note.

(3.) The second defendant also states that he has taken steps to attach the properties of the first defendant in patta No.1111. The survey numbers and the extent is (1)S.F. No. 82/11 to an extent of 0.38.5 ares; (2) S.F. No. 683/11A to an extent of 0.12.5 ares; (3) S.F. No. 683/17D to an extent of 0.04.5 ares; (4) S.F. No. 683/19A2 to an extent of 0.13.0 ares; (5) S.F. No. 683/20D to an extent of 0.16.5 ares; (6) S.F. No. 83/2B2 to an extent of 0.01.5 ares; (7) S.F. No. 709/6 to an extent of 0.26.5 ares. After contested by both the parties in the above said suit, the same was decreed on 23.02.2006 in favour of this second defendnat. But, the first defendant had not preferred any appeal as against the decree and it has become final and when he failed to satisfy the decree amount, the second defendant has filed the Execution Petition in E.P. No. 47 of 2006 for attachment of the above said property for sale. But, even when the E.P. proceedings were going on the first defendant/J.D. did not pay any amount.