UNNAMALAI AMMAL Vs. RAMAKRISHNAN MUDALIAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Civil Revision Petition has been preferred against the order, dated 29.01.2008 made in E.A.No.558 of 2007 in V.O.S.No.333 of 1981 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Tindivanam.

(2.) IT is seen that the revision petitioner herein had filed the application in E.A.No.558 of 2007 under Order 6 Rule 16 and 17 r/w Section 151 CPC, whereby sought permission to amend/strike out certain portion of the averments in her counter. IT was resisted by the respondent herein.

(3.) IT is not in dispute that the suit in V.O.S.No.333 of 1981 was filed for declaration of title and recovery of possession and the same was decreed in favour of the respondent herein. Pursuant to the decree, the respondent filed the Execution Petition before the court below for delivery of possession of the suit properties, the same is pending for about 27 years and the same is not in dispute. On a perusal of the material papers and after hearing the arguments of the learned counsel, I am of the view that it cannot be presumed that the counsel for the petitioner before the executing court had made any averments, without the instructions of the petitioner, prejudicial to her interest. Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court is of the view that permitting the petitioner to strike out certain portion of the averment already made in the counter cannot be permitted, to meet the ends of justice. If it is needed, the petitioner/judgment-debtor can file only an additional counter before the court below.