Wednesday, 13, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

K.Machakanni vs A.P.L.Mohaideen
2022 Latest Caselaw 13941 Mad

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 13941 Mad
Judgement Date : 4 August, 2022

Madras High Court
K.Machakanni vs A.P.L.Mohaideen on 4 August, 2022
                                                                               CRP(PD)(MD)No.1202 of 2022


                         BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                    DATED : 04.08.2022

                                                           CORAM:

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI

                                                 CRP(PD)(MD)No.1202 of 2022
                                                  CMP(MD)No.4906 of 2022

                     K.Machakanni                                                  ... Petitioner

                                                             versus

                     1. A.P.L.Mohaideen
                     2. Badhusha
                     3. Bagavathy                                                  ... Respondents

                                  Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution
                     of India, seeking a direction to the learned Principal District Judge,
                     Thoothukudi to take on file and number the petition in unnumbered
                     E.A.../2022 in E.A.No.926/18 in E.P.No.16/14 in O.S.No.121/12 on the
                     file of the learned Principal Sub Judge, Tenkasi.


                                        For Petitioner    : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai
                                        For R1            : Mr.S.S.Thesigan




                     1/6



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                             CRP(PD)(MD)No.1202 of 2022




                                                          ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the return of

unnumbered application filed in E.A.No.926 of 2018 in E.P.No.16 of

2014 in O.S.No.121 of 2012 on the file of the learned Principal Sub

Judge, Tenkasi.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that

the suit in O.S.No.121 of 2012 was filed by the second respondent

against the third respondent for recovery of money. The said suit was

decreed by Judgment and Decree dated 22.01.2014. Since the third

respondent has not paid the money, his property was attached and also

brought for sale. The first respondent is the purchaser in the Court

auction and he has filed an application for delivery in E.A.No.926 of

2018. The petitioner, who is the adjacent owner, has also filed an

application under Order 21 Rule 97 C.P.C with an allegation that the

property has wrongly been mentioned, including a part of his property

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP(PD)(MD)No.1202 of 2022

also. However, it was not numbered and returned by the Court below

as it was not maintainable. Aggrieved over the same, the present Civil

Revision Petition has been filed.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, by relying

upon the Judgment of this Court reported in (2016) 1 MWN (Civil) 712

(P.K.Vinayagam vs. Saraswathi and another), further submits that a

part of the petitioner's property has wrongly been added in the property,

which was sold in the Court auction and the petitioner was also not a

party to the suit. He further submits that the petitioner can establish his

case only by way of filing an application under Order 21 Rule 97

C.P.C. Without providing an opportunity, the Court below has

returned the application. Therefore, an opportunity must be provided

as laid down by this Court in the citation as cited supra.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the first respondent submits

that the Judgment-debtor, who lost his case, has set up the petitioner

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP(PD)(MD)No.1202 of 2022

herein to defeat the claim of the first respondent.

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused

the materials available on record.

6. The petitioner claims that he was assigned with a land to an

extent of 70.35 sq. metres and he has also put up a construction in that

land. A portion of his property has also been added as a property of the

3rd respondent and put into the auction.

7. Since the petitioner is raising certain plea and he was also not a

party to the suit and subsequent proceedings, he must be provided an

opportunity. Therefore, the learned Principal Sub Judge, Tenkasi, shall

number the application and decide the same, after providing an

opportunity of hearing, within a period of one month from the date of

receipt of a copy of this order.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP(PD)(MD)No.1202 of 2022

8. With the above direction, the Civil Revision Petition is

disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous

petition is closed.

04.08.2022 ogy Index : Yes / No Internet: Yes / No.

Note : The Registry is directed to return the original impugned order.

To

1. The learned Principal Sub Judge, Tenkasi.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP(PD)(MD)No.1202 of 2022

B.PUGALENDHI, J.

ogy

CRP(PD)(MD)No.1202 of 2022

04.08.2022

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter