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

Arukkani vs R.Sivanantham
2022 Latest Caselaw 789 Mad

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 789 Mad
Judgement Date : 19 January, 2022

Madras High Court
Arukkani vs R.Sivanantham on 19 January, 2022
                                                                         C.R.P.Nos.268 & 269 of 2021
                                                                           and CMP.No.2513 of 2021

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
                                               DATED: 19.01.2022
                                                    CORAM:
                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
                                           C.R.P.Nos.268 & 269 of 2021
                                                      and
                                              CMP.No.2513 of 2021

                     Arukkani                                          ..Petitioner in both CRP
                                                       Vs.

                     1.R.Sivanantham

                     2.Rukmani

                     3.Jaganathan

                     4.Kolandasamy

                     5.R.S.Nallasivam

                     6.Loganayaki

                     7.Throwpathi

                     8.Gandhimathi                                  ..Respondents in both CRP

                     Common Prayer: Civil Revision Petitions filed under Section 115 of CPC.,
                     against the fair and decreetal order dated 10.12.2020 made in EA.Nos.13 &
                     14 of 2020 in E.A.No.7 of 2019 in EP.No.22 of 2008 in OS.No.320 of 1999


                     1/7


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                               C.R.P.Nos.268 & 269 of 2021
                                                                                 and CMP.No.2513 of 2021

                     on the file of the First Additional District Munsif Court, Erode.


                                  For Petitioner in both CRP    : Mr.Harish for Mr.N.Manoharan
                                  For Respondents in both CRP : No appearance


                                                COMMON ORDER
                                  Despite service, respondents are not appering either in person or

                     through counsel, duly instructed.



                                  2.These two revisions are directed against the orders passed in

                     EA.Nos.13 & 14 of 2020 in EA.No.7 of 2019 in EP.No.22 of 2008.

                     EP.No.22 of 2008 is an execution petition, seeking execution of a decree for

                     mandatory injunction granted in AS.No.56 of 2015. A suit in OS.No.320 of

                     1999 was originally filed for the relief of permanent injunction and mandatory

                     injunction. The Trial Court granted a decree for permanent injunction alone.

                     On appeal, the Appellate Court granted a decree for mandatory injunction.

                     The petitioner, who claims to be a third party, filed EA.No.7 of 2019, setting

                     up independent title over the property in question. Being an application filed

                     under Order 21 Rule 97 of CPC., the petitioner was allowed to lead evidence


                     2/7


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                C.R.P.Nos.268 & 269 of 2021
                                                                                   and CMP.No.2513 of 2021

                     in EA.No.7 of 2019. During the course of the enquiry, the petitioner filed

                     applications in EA.Nos.13 & 14 of 2020, seeking condonation of delay in

                     filing certain documents and to re-call herself as PW1 to mark those

                     documents.



                                  3.The said applications were opposed on the ground that the

                     petitioner is attempting to delay further proceedings.            The execution

                     application in EA.No.7 of 2019 itself has been filed by the petitioner

                     obstructing execution of the decree, setting up independent claim. The same

                     will have to be tried as a suit, where all questions relating to title and interest

                     of the parties to the proceedings will have to be gone into by the Court

                     executing the decree. The learned Trial Judge has dismissed the applications

                     solely on the ground of delay and the fact that the right of the petitioner is not

                     being denied by the other respondents, who are defendants in the suit. The

                     said observation of the learned District Munsif is not correct. The petitioner,

                     asserts a right against the decree holders and not against co-judgment debtors.

                     The decree holders, are opposing the claim of the petitioner. Therefore, it is



                     3/7


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                C.R.P.Nos.268 & 269 of 2021
                                                                                  and CMP.No.2513 of 2021

                     for the petitioner to prove her title or interest in the property by adducing

                     evidence. All that the petitioner seeks is to let in evidence. I do not think, the

                     learned Trial Judge was right in dismissing the applications to produce

                     documents and to re-call PW1.



                                  4.In view of the above, these civil revision petitions are allowed,

                     the orders of the I-Additional District Munsif, Erode made in EA.Nos.13 &

                     14 of 2020 are set aside. Applications in EA.Nos.13 & 14 of 2020 will stand

                     allowed. The petitioner will be entitled to produce documents and lead

                     evidence.      No costs.   Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is

                     closed. The petitioner shall complete her evidence within a period of three

                     months from the date of commencement of the proceedings before the Trial

                     Court after this order.



                                                                                            19.01.2022
                     kkn

                     Index:No
                     Internet:Yes
                     Speaking

                     4/7


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                               C.R.P.Nos.268 & 269 of 2021
                                                                 and CMP.No.2513 of 2021




                     To-

                     The I-Additional District Munsif Court,
                     Erode.




                     5/7


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                          C.R.P.Nos.268 & 269 of 2021
                                            and CMP.No.2513 of 2021




                                       R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.

KKN

C.R.P.Nos.268 & 269 of 2021 and CMP.No.2513 of 2021

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.Nos.268 & 269 of 2021 and CMP.No.2513 of 2021

19.01.2022

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