Madras High Court
Narayanasamy Nadar & Sons vs Jeetendrakumar Mulchandji Jain on 24 November, 2021
CRP.(NPD).No.596/2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 24.11.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR
CRP.(NPD).No.596/2019 & CMP.No.3989/2019
[Video Conferencing]
Narayanasamy Nadar & Sons .. Petitioner
Vs.
1.Jeetendrakumar Mulchandji Jain,
Proprietor of M/s. Supreme Agency,
Ankleswar, Bharuch District,
Gujarat State.
2.Sairam & Company, Raathinam Agency,
51/1/39, Acharappan, 1st Floor,
Chennai,
Tamil Nadu, Pin 600 001. .. Respondents
Prayer:- Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution
of India to aside the order dated 05.01.2019 and made in
E.P.No.1202/2016 in O.S.No.34/2003 on the file of the learned X Assistant
Judge, City Civil Court at Chennai.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Amardeep
For R1 : Mr.R.Imayavaramban
for M/s.Ramalingam
and Associates
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1
CRP.(NPD).No.596/2019
ORDER
(1) This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order dated
05.01.2019 in E.P.No.1202/2016 in O.S.No.34/2003 on the file of
the learned X Assistant Judge, City Civil Court at Chennai for
attaching the movables of the judgment debtor namely the revision
petitioner/1st defendant. The 1st respondent/decree holder obtained a
money decree. The decree was passed in Special Civil Suit
No.34/2003 before the Sub Court at Ankleswar in Gujarat.
(2) It is admitted that the Decree was transmitted for execution to the
City Civil Court, Chennai and numbered as E.P.No.1202/2016. The
1st respondent/decree holder filed the Execution Petition for
attachment of the movables of the judgment debtor found in the
premises of M./s.Narayana Swamy Nadar & Sons, a Dhall Mill,
which according to the revision petitioner/1st defendant is closed.
(3) Though the revision petitioner/1st defendant has stated something
high about his status and financial position, the decree in the Suit
in O.S.No.34/2003 filed before the Sub Court in Gujarat cannot be
challenged in the Execution Petition in E.P.No.1202/2016 as
CRP.(NPD).No.596/2019
findings of the Court regarding liability of the judgment debtor has
become final. Since, the decree is transmitted to the City Civil
Court for execution, this Court is unable to consider any valid
points to entertain this Civil Revision Petition. It is stated by the
revision petitioner/1st defendant that the Suit in O.S.No.34/2003
was decreed against the revision petitioner/1 st defendant and that
the Suit was dismissed as against the respondent/2nd defendant.
(4) The only ground raised by the revision petitioner/1 st defendant is
that the Suit in O.S.No.34/2003 was dismissed against the
respondent/2nd defendant and that the Execution Petition filed
against both. It is to be seen that the Execution Petition is filed only
against the revision petitioner/1st defendant and not against the
respondent/2nd defendant. It is not in dispute that the properties
which are sought to be attached are the properties of the revision
petitioner/1st defendant. Therefore, the order directing attachment
of the movables found in the premises of revision petitioner/1st
defendant cannot be found fault with.
CRP.(NPD).No.596/2019
(5) It is seen, that the revision petitioner/1st defendant has deposited a
sum of Rs.1,50,000/- in compliance of the direction of this Court
while granting Interim Stay. Though the learned counsel appearing
for the revision petitioner states that there is a possibility of
settlement, this Court is unable to find a concrete proposal from the
counsel. The learned counsel himself admitted that the respondent
did not agree to waive the interest portion.
(6) In such circumstances there is no purpose in adjourning of matter
under the pretext of settlement. The judgment debtor is liable to
pay a sum of Rs.4,85,695/- with interest @9% p.a., from the date of
filing of the Suit. The Suit was filed in the year 2003 before the
Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ankleshwar. The movables of the
revision petitioner/1st defendant were being attached, as per the
impugned order. This Court is unable to find any irregularity in the
order attaching the movables belonged to the revision petitioner/1st
defendant judgment debtor.
(7) Since, this Court finds no merits in the present petition, the Civil
CRP.(NPD).No.596/2019
Revision Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
24.11.2021
cda
Internet : Yes
To
1.The X Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.
CRP.(NPD).No.596/2019
S.S.SUNDAR, J.,
cda
CRP.(NPD).No.596/2019
24.11.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6
