TAHSILDAR TAHSILDAR OFFICE SANKARANK OIL Vs. PETCHIAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this civil revision petition the fair and decreetal orders, dated 14.03.2007, passed in E.P.No.532 of 2004 in O.S.No.419 of 1997, on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Sankarankoil, are impugned.

(2.) It is found that the respondent had laid the suit in O.S.No.419 of 1997 as against the petitioners herein for the reliefs of declaration and permanent injunction. It is further found that the said suit, after contest, had ended in a decree in favour of the respondent / plaintiff. It is further found that in respect of the same subject matter comprised in O.S.No.419 of 1997, the respondent / plaintiff had laid another suit in O.S.No.247 of 1998, against certain third parties for the reliefs of permanent injunction and recovery of possession. It is found that the said suit laid by the respondent had come to be dismissed. It is, thus, found that as against the same subject matter, the suit laid by the respondent herein, wherein the petitioners herein are the parties, had been decreed and the another suit laid by the respondent herein for the same subject matter, as against some third parties, had come to be dismissed. As regards, O.S.No.247 of 1998, it is found that the relief of possession claimed by the respondent herein had been negatived.

(3.) Be that as it may, alleging that the petitioners had disobeyed the Judgment and Decree passed in O.S.No.419 of 1997 by initiating Patta proceedings in favour of the third parties, the respondent herein had levied execution proceedings against them in E.P.No.532 of 2004. The said execution petition had been laid under Order XXI Rule 32(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The said execution petition had been resisted by the petitioners herein contending that they had not acted in disobedience of the Judgment and Decree passed in O.S.No.419 of 1997 and all the proceedings that had been taken by them in respect of the subject matter were taken only prior to the passing of the Judgment and Decree and after the Judgment and Decree, they had not resorted to any action in violation of the same and hence, the execution petition is liable to be dismissed. In this connection, it is found that the Court below, on a consideration of the evidence adduced on the petitioners' side that they had issued Patta on 25.05.1998 and in O.S.No.419 of 1997, they had been restrained from issuing Patta in respect of the subject matter in favour of the third parties and the said action on their part is in violation of the Judgment and Decree passed by the Court below and therefore, they are liable to be punished, had ordered further proceedings against the petitioners in the execution petition. Impugning the same, the present civil revision petition has been preferred.