K VIJAYAKUMAR Vs. N SRIRAMULU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE order passed in E.A.No.97 of 2008 in EP.No.70 of 2002 in RCOP.No.133 of 1993 on the file of the District Munsif, Alandur is under challenge in this revision. E.A.No.97 of 2008 was filed by the present revision petitioner under Section 45 of the Evidence Act r/w Order 26 Rule 10A and 151 of CPC. THE revision petitioner is a third party to the RCOP proceedings in RCOP.No.133 of 1993 on the file of the Rent Controller, Thambaram, against which E.P.No.70 of 2002 was filed to execute the decree of eviction.

(2.) IT is the case of the revision petitioner that the landlord in RCOP.No.133 of 1993 had entered into an agreement of sale dated 12.08.1992 with the landlord in respect of the petition scheduled property and that in pursuance of it, he had paid Rs.9 lakhs out of the total sale consideration of Rs.10 lakhs and he is yet to pay only a sum of Rs.1 lakh to get the sale deed executed in his favour. IT is the case of the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner that in pursuance of the sale agreement dated 12.08.1992 entered into between the landlord and him, he was put in possession of the petition scheduled property. But the learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent/landlord would state that he has obtained an order of eviction in RCOP.No.133 of 1993 on the file of the Rent Controller, Thambaram, against the tenant and that in EP.No.70 of 2002 delivery was ordered and he got possession of the property and only delivery is to be recorded. The revision petitioner had filed EA.No.97 of 2008 seeking indulgence of the Execution Court to compare the signature of the landlord in the sale agreement dated 12.08.1992 with that of the admitted signature to show that the sale agreement entered into between the landlord and the revision petitioner herein is valid and binding on the 1st respondent / landlord. As rightly observed by the learned Execution Court in EA.No.97 of 2008, whether the sale agreement dated 12.08.1992 entered into between the landlord and the revision petitioner is valid or not is not the matter to be decided in the EP, but the point for determination is whether the landlord / petitioner in E.P.No.70 of 2002 is entitled to execute the decree passed in RCOP.No.130 of 1993. The Execution Court has rightly dismissed EA.No.97 of 2008.

(3.) WITH these observations, the Revision is dismissed confirming the order passed in E.A.No97 of 2008 in E.P.No.70 of 2002 in RCOP.No.133 of 1993 on the file of the District Munsif, Alandur. No costs. Connected Miscellaneous petition is closed.