V SANTHI Vs. K DINAKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The suit is filed by the plaintiff to set aside the compromise award passed by the Lok Adalat in O.S.No.47 of 2010 on the file of the District Munsif, Salem dated 21.04.2010 and for permanent injunction. The defendants have filed the above revision challenging the order of dismissal of I.A.No.457 of 2014, which was filed under Order VII Rule 11 of C.P.C to reject the plaint.

(2.) The case of the petitioners is that the suit property belonged to the first petitioner and the respondent was inducted as a tenant in the year 2006. When the respondent was requested to vacate the premises, O.S.No.47 of 2010 was filed by him for injunction. When the said suit was referred to the Lok Adalat, the respondent agreed to vacate the premises in 18 months and also gave an undertaking that he would vacate and deliver the possession on 18.07.2011. But, the respondent did not keep his promise and continued to occupy the suit building. Hence, the petitioners filed an execution petition in R.E.P.No.348 of 2011, treating the award of the Lok Adalat as decree. The plaintiff has also filed R.E.A.No.201 of 2012 under Section 47 C.P.C praying dismissal of R.E.P. Section 47 of C.P.C contemplates that all questions arising between the parties to the suit, shall be determined by the Court executing the decree and not by a separate suit. The present application is filed under Order VII Rule 11 C.P.C. Besides, it is stated that the decree being passed in the Lok Adalat with consent, it is not open to the plaintiff to challenge the same.

(3.) The said application was resisted by the plaintiff contending that the award passed in the Lok Adlat is not an order of eviction and therefore, the same cannot be put in execution and it was further contended that Section 47 C.P.C is not a bar to file an independent suit.