KOODAMMAL Vs. A.RAMAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition has been preferred against the order and docket order dated 11.08.2017 made in E.P.No.37 of 2017 in O.S.No.28 of 2014 on the file of the District Judge, Tirunelveli.

(2.) In the grounds of revision, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that while passing the docket order by the learned Principal District Judge, Tirunelveli is not proper and has failed to look out the facts and the proper procedure has not been followed by the said Court. Further grievance raised by the petitioner is that the execution petition was filed for recovering a sum of Rs.12,52,000/- and in the sale proclamation also the said amount has been stated. Whereas the mortgage property value was fixed by the executing Court for a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- and going to be sale on 26.10.2018. But, the market value of the mortgage property is more than 25,00,000/-.

(3.) On hearing of both side and on perusal of records, it is observed that the suit in O.S.No.28 of 2014 was filed by the respondent for directing the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.12,52,000/- with subsequent interest at 24% per annum for the date of plaint till date of payment and to pass a preliminary decree directing the petitioner to pay the sum of Rs.12,52,000/0 with interest thereon at 24% per annum within a date to be fixed by the Court, in default to pass a final decree for sale of the schedule property and to adjust the sale proceeds towards the decree amount including the charges and costs incurred thereto. In the said suit, the trial after observing the oral and documentary evidence, has passed a preliminary decree on 27.01.2016 directing the petitioner to pay the decreetal amount within the period of 3 months. Since no amount was paid, final decree was also passed on 01.02.2017.