N KRISHNAVENI Vs. P L NARASIMHA RAO CHENNAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (Civil Revision Petitions are filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 7.6.2002 and 24.8.2006 made in E.A.No 75 of 2002 in E.P.No: 12 of 1993, in RCOP.No:4 of 1978, passed by the learned District Munsif, Alandur. Tr.CMP has been filed under Section 24 CPC to withdraw EP.No:12 of 1993 in RCOP.NO.4 of 1978 pending on the file of the District Munsif, Alandur and transfer the same to the District Munsif Court, at Poonamallee to be tried as joint trial along with O.S.No.556 of 1997 as per order of this court made in Tr.CMP.No:8791 of 1999 dated 1.11.1999.) Both the Civil Revision Petitions are filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 7.6.2002 and 24.8.2006 made in E.A.No 75 of 2002 in E.P.No: 12 of 1993, in RCOP.No:4 of 1978, passed by the learned District Munsif, Alandur, by which the learned Judge permitted the respondent/judgement debtor to file the petition under Section 47 CPC by taking on file the said petition and issuing of notice and also countenanced the amendments carried out by the respondent without permission of the court.

(2.) THE Transfer CMP is filed to withdraw the very E.P.No:12 of 1993 in RCOP.NO.4 of 1978 pending on the file of the District Munsif, Alandur and transfer the same to the District Munsif Court, at Poonamallee to be tried as joint trial along with O.S.No.556 of 1997 pending on the file of the same District Court, Alandur.

(3.) THE above dates and events would disclose the long checkered background of the RCOP case and also reveal the dilatory tactics of the respondent in dragging on the execution proceedings and is using the process of law as a tool of oppression and deceit to achieve his sinister motives. From the dates and events, it is clear that in the RCOP the respondent filed a counter mainly objecting that he is not the tenant and the school run by him was the tenant; the entire property was not leased out to him, but only some rooms were leased and other land were occupied by the school and superstructure was constructed on its own; and the petitioner is not entitled to claim property for her own occupation etc., Initially an order of eviction has been passed on 11.11.1979 in the RCOP and the same was set aside and remitted for trial by the Sub Court, Chengalpattu in the appeal. Once again due to the non appearance of the respondent, an ex parte order was passed on 18.6.1982. THE I.A.89 of 1992 filed to set aside the above ex parte order of eviction was dismissed on 18.9.1982 on merits. THE said dismissal was challenged in Appeal before the Subordinate Court, Chengalpattu and also in Revision before this court in CRP.No:5584 of 1983 which have confirmed the order of eviction. THE respondent has not filed any appeal against the order of this court and therefore the order of eviction has become final. THEreafter, the petitioner filed E.P.No.12 of 1993.