M KARUPPANNAN Vs. M PONNUSAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE civil revision petitioner/defendant/respondent has preferred this civil revision petition aggrieved against the order dated 12.04.2006 in I.A.No.201 of 2005 in O.S.No.721 of 2003 passed by the Principal Subordinate Judge, Salem in allowing the application filed by the respondent/plaintiff/petitioner under Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code and ordered the sum of Rs.1,13,130/- to be paid to the respondent/plaintiff/petitioner's Advocate Thiru.M.Marimuthu by means of cheque.

(2.) THE trial Court, while passing orders in I.A.No.201 of 2005, has inter alia stated that I.A.No.33 of 2005 has been ordered on 31.03.2005 permitting the respondent/plaintiff/petitioner to receive the amount lying in Court deposit etc. and resultantly, has allowed the application and directing the issuance of cheque for a sum of Rs.1,13,130/- to be issued in favour of respondent/plaintiff/ petitioner's Advocate Thiru M.Marimuthu.'

(3.) THE learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff submits that the revision petitioner/defendant has no locus to file the revision petition in the eye of law because a debtor is a dead person and in any event, he is not going to get his money already deposited in the trial Court and further that he has created bogus debtors and if the revision petitioner is really interested in welfare of the creditors then he should have filed a petition praying the Insolvency Court to vest his entire movable and immovable properties with the Official Receiver at the earliest and the aim of the revision petitioner/ defendant is to drag on the matter endlessly as far as possible and therefore, prays for dismissal of the revision petition.