Madras High Court
A.Jeyam vs S.Viswanathan on 22 October, 2021
CMA(MD)No.264 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 22.10.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
CMA(MD)No.264 of 2021
CMP(MD)Nos.2214 & 8411 of 2021
1.A.Jeyam
2.A.Anantha Subramaniam
... Appellants
vs.
1.S.Viswanathan
2.A.Anantha Srinivasan ... Respondents
PRAYER : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Order XLIII Rule 1(f)
of CPC read with Section 21 read with 58 (4) of CPC to set aside the
order dated 18.09.2018 passed in EA.No.4 of 2017 in EP.No.23 of 2015
in OS.No.55 of 2013 on the file of the I Additional District Court,
Thoothukudi.
For Appellants :Mr.S.C.Herold Singh
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/4
CMA(MD)No.264 of 2021
JUDGMENT
The appellants filed this appeal to set aside the order dated
18.09.2018 passed in EA.No.4 of 2017 in EP.No.23 of 2015 in OS.No.55
of 2013 on the file of the I Additional District Court, Thoothukudi.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants.
3. The third parties filed EA.No.4 of 2017 to raise attachment in
EP.No.23 of 2015. The first respondent/plaintiff filed suit in OS.No.55
of 2013 for recovery of money. The suit was decreed. Then the first
respondent/plaintiff filed EP.No.23 of 2015 for attachment. In the said
Execution Petition, the third parties filed EA.No.4 of 2017.
4. As per the averments in the petition, the property in the
Execution Petition originally belongs to one Thathalakshmi Ammal by
way of sale deed dated 16.06.1980. She died on 26.12.2003. Her son
one P.S.Anandharaman Ayyar inherited the petition schedule property.
P.S.Anandharaman Ayyar died on 12.06.2008. Then the suit property
was inherited by the appellants and the second respondent. Both the
parties enjoyed the property jointly. The appellants were entitled for 2/3
share of the property and the second respondent was entitled for 1/3
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA(MD)No.264 of 2021
share of the property. Hence, attachment cannot be ordered for the entire
property in the Execution Petition.
5. The appellants filed sale deed, legal heir certificate of one
Thathalakshmi Ammal and legal heir certificate of P.S.Anandharaman
Ayyar. As per the documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A4, the appellants are entitled
for 2/3 share in the petition mentioned property. On the other hand, the
second respondent has not filed any document. The first
respondent/plaintiff also has not filed any document. So, considering the
documents filed on the side of the appellants, this Civil Miscellaneous
Appeal is allowed and the order in EA.No.4 of 2017 is set aside.
Attachment order in EP.No.23 of 2015 is modified to the effect that
attachment is only with regard to 1/3 share of the petition mentioned
property. Further the first respondent/plaintiff is at liberty to proceed
against the other property of the second respondent. No costs.
Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
22.10.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
mbi
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA(MD)No.264 of 2021
S.ANANTHI, J.
mbi
Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a
web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring
that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the
responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
To
The I Additional District Court,
Thoothukudi
CMA(MD)No.264 of 2021
22.10.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
