CHINNARASU Vs. PEYAPPA GOUNDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner/defendant has filed this civil revision petition as against the order dated 21.8.2009 in R.E.A.No.118 of 2009 in R.E.P. No. 97 of 2008 in O.S.No. 350 of 2006 passed by the Learned District Munsif Krishnagiri.

(2.) The Executing Court while passing orders on 21.8.2009 in R.E.A.No. 118 of 2009 in R.E.P. No. 97 of 2008 in O.S. No. 350 of 2006 has inter alia observed that 'Counter not filed petition allowed subject to the substantial payment not less than Rs. 25,000/- towards the petition amount by 23.9.2009'.

(3.) The Learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant submits that the order of the Executing Court dated 21.8.2009 in R.E.A. No. 118 of 2009 in R.E.P. No. 97 of 2008 in O.S. No. 350 of 2006 is an erroneous one in the eye of law and the petitioner being a Junior Assistant cannot pay a sum of Rs. 25,000/- in one lumpsum but this aspect of the matter has not been looked into by the Executing Court and as the matter of fact, the petitioner has never borrowed any amount from the Decree Holder and that the respondent/Decree Holder has obtained the signature in a pronote without paying any money to the petitioner and thus the petitioner disputes his whole liability and that the Executing Court ought not to have ordered the arrest of the petitioner and moreover, the petitioner has stated in his affidavit that he is willing to pay a sum of Rs. 500/- towards part payment in order to raise the warrant of arrest and an ex parte decree is sought to be executed in the present execution proceedings and these aspects of the matter have not been looked into by the Executing Court in a real prospective and therefore prays for along the civil revision petition in furtherance of substantial cause of justice.