Wednesday, 20, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

R.Anbazagan vs K.S.Raju Achari
2022 Latest Caselaw 11177 Mad

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 11177 Mad
Judgement Date : 27 June, 2022

Madras High Court
R.Anbazagan vs K.S.Raju Achari on 27 June, 2022
                                                                              C.R.P.(NPD)No.1971 of 2022

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                      DATED : 27.06.2022

                                                           CORAM :

                                   THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA

                                                 C.R.P.(NPD).No.1971 of 2022
                                                            and
                                                    C.M.P.No.9983 of 2022

                     R.Anbazagan                                                       ...Petitioner
                                                                ..Vs..
                     1. K.S.Raju Achari
                     2. R.Arivukkodi
                     3. R.Arivarasu                                                   ... Respondents

                     Prayer:- Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the
                     Constitution of India, against the fair and decretal order passed in E.P.
                     No.128 of 2017 in O.S.No.17 of 2011 dated 31.08.2021 on the file of the
                     Principal Sub Judge, Vellore.

                                        For Petitioner      : Mr.V.Lakshminarayanan

                                                            ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition has been preferred challenging the fair

and decretal order dated 31.08.2021 made in E.P.No.128 of 2017 in

O.S.No.17 of 2011 on the file of the Principal Sub Court,Vellore.

Page No.1/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.(NPD)No.1971 of 2022

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the

materials available on record.

3. The revision petitioner is one of the judgment debtors of the

decree passed in O.S.No.17 of 2011. The first respondent/decree holder

is the father of the revision petitioner. In O.S.No.17 of 2011, a decree for

maintenance has been passed as under :

DECREE

1.That the suit be and the same is hereby partly decree with regard to maintenance and that the defendants 1 to 3 are hereby directed to pay jointly or severally the maintenance of Rs.3,000/- per month to the plaintiff from the date of suit till the date of realization.

2.That the suit be and the same is hereby dismissed in respect of partition.

3.That the suit be and the same is hereby dismissed in respect of mandatory injunction.

4.That the defendants 1 to 3 do also pay a sum

Page No.2/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.(NPD)No.1971 of 2022

of Rs.6,535.50/- to the plaintiff towards costs of the suit.

5.That the 1st defendant side cost is Rs.5,105/-

6. That the 3rd defendant side cost is Rs.7,615/-.''

4. The first respondent/decree holder has filed the execution

petition in order to recover the decree amount. However, he had chosen

to execute the decree against the 3rd respondent/judgment debtor alone.

During the pendency of the execution proceedings, the Execution Court

has passed an order of attachment on the property belonging to the

revision petitioner/3rd defendant. Aggrieved over that, the petitioner has

filed this revision petition.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, despite the

decree for maintenance was passed against the three sons, who are the

defendants 1 to 3 in the suit, the other defendants i.e 1 and 2 are also

liable to pay the decree amount. However, the decree holder had opted to

recover the decree amount only by attaching the property belonging to

Page No.3/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.(NPD)No.1971 of 2022

the third defendant and the order of attachment of his property is not fair.

6. In the decree of the Court itself it is clearly specified that the

defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the maintenance amount

of Rs.3,000/- per month to the respondent/plaintiff. Though the

defendants 1 to 3 are also liable to pay the decree amount, the decree

holder has exercised his option to realise the decree amount by attaching

the properties belonging to either of the judgment debtors. However, the

judgment debtor, who had fulfilled the decree is entitled to recover the

share of the liability of the other defendants from them. As such, I find

no factual or legal error in the order passed by the learned Executing

Judge for attaching the property of the third defendant.

7. In the result, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed and the

fair and decreetal order dated 31.08.2021 passed in E.P.No.128 of 2017

in O.S.No.17 of 2011 by the learned Principal Sub Judge, Vellore is

Page No.4/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.(NPD)No.1971 of 2022

confirmed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is

closed.

27.06.2022

Index:Yes No Speaking Order:Yes/No ms

To

The Principal Sub Judge, Vellore.

Page No.5/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.(NPD)No.1971 of 2022

R.N.MANJULA, J.

ms

C.R.P.(NPD).No.1971 of 2022 and C.M.P.No.9983 of 2022

27.06.2022

Page No.6/6

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 : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter