MURGAN Vs. PERUMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition has been filed to set aside the order passed by the learned Principal District Munsif, Manamadurai in E.A.No.133 of 2017 in E.P.No.18 of 2017 in O.S.No.221 of 2009 dtd. 22/12/2017.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the respondent herein, as plaintiff, has filed a suit in O.S.No.221 of 2009, seeking recovery of possession against the petitioner herein. The said suit was set ex-parte and on 24/1/2017, an ex-parte decree was passed. Thereafter, the decree holder/respondent herein has filed execution petition in E.P.No.18 of 2017 seeking recovery. In the meantime, the petitioner has filed an interlocutory application in I.A.No.526 of 2017 under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short 'Code') to set aside the ex-parte decree and the same is pending. Citing this, the petitioner has filed E.A.No.133 of 2017 under Order 21 Rule 26 of the Code to stay the execution petition till the disposal of the said interlocutory application and the same was dismissed by the trial Court.

(3.) The learned Counsel for the petitioner would place reliance on the judgment of this Court in the case of M.Nazruddin vs. The Idol of Arulmigu Navaneedha Krishnasami and Durgai Ammal Vahaira Temples, represented by Trustees and others (C.R.P.No.3096 of 1998, decided on 16/11/1998), wherein, at Paragraph 14, it is held as follows: