ABDUL MOHAMMED Vs. ARUMUGHAM PILLAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant in this second appeal, one Abdul Mohammed, and respondent Arumugham Pillai were owners of neighboring properties. Disputes arose between them and they ended up in civil Court, each one filing a suit against the other for injunction. Both the suits were dismissed by the trial Court, and the respective appeals filed against such dismissal shared the same fate. The appellant Abdul Mohammed, however, took the matter in second appeal before this Court in S.A. No. 895 of 1970. While disposing of that second appeal, this Court passed the following decree:

(2.) M .R.S. Tyagaraja Ayyar, learned Counsel for appellant did not wish that I should go into the question whether a fresh suit would be an appropriate remedy or whether the matter could be agitated in execution of the decree of this Court. He referred to provisions of Section 47(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure (before its amendment by Central Act 104 of 1976) and said that the executing Court has always the power to convert even a proceeding in execution as a suit and try it as a suit subject to proper court -fee being paid thereon on the basis that it is a suit.