JEYAKANTHAN Vs. SELVANATHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner filed the above Civil Revision Petition, challenging the order of the executing Court the Principal District Munsif Court, Pudukottai in EASR No.460 of 2007, dated 29.03.2007 in E.P.No.31 of 2006 in R.C.O.P.No.11 of 1997.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the lower Court has omitted to note that the execution petition in E.P.No.31 of 2006 in R.C.O.P.No.11 of 1997 is not legally constituted and the first respondent is no longer a landlord to institute the execution petition. The proper person is only the revision petitioner who has already acquired interest in the property by means of sale agreement and have obtained constructive possession from the second respondent for consideration. There is no right to survive to the E.P. petitioner. He would further submit that the lower Court has failed to consider that the petitioner has got the right to record full satisfaction of the execution and also failed to note that there is discrepancy in the description of the property and the proceedings is unnecessary and void.

(3.) On side of the petitioner, it is stated that the agreement to transfer is enough for the petitioner to receive the possession of the property and by the agreement, the petitioner is stepping into the shoes of the first respondent.