AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M. Venugopal, J.—The Civil Revision Petition petitioners/respondents/defendants have filed this Civil Revision petition as against the order
dated 29/1/2009 in E.P. No. 195 of 2005 in O.S. No. 414 of 1997 passed by the learned Principal Sub-Judge, Dindigul in allowing the petition
for taking further proceedings. The Executing Court while passing that order in E.P. No. 195 of 2005 in O.S. No. 414 of 1997 dated 20/4/2009
as among other things observed that the execution proceedings have been initiated by means of bringing the properties to sale and that the first
petitioner has expired and the said execution proceedings have been initiated by other petitioners and the objection in regard to the fact that a sum
of Rs. 27,500/- has been remitted to the respondents/petitioners/plaintiffs have not been proved through satisfactory evidence and resultantly for
the present, the petition has been allowed for taking further proceedings.
The learned Counsel for the revision petitioners/respondents/defendants contends that the order passed by the Executing Court in E.P. No. 195
of 2005 in O.S. No. 414 of 1997 dated 29/1/2009 is contrary to law and facts and that the Executing Court ought to have seen that the
plaintiff/decree holder had died and only his legal representatives have projected the Execution Petition in issue and all the persons have not been
joined in the execution proceedings and this aspect of the matter has not been looked into by the Executing Court in proper perspective and if
certain individuals who are actually the legal representatives of the deceased/plaintiff have been left out, then, it is open to pay the decreetal amount
to them alone and the Executing Court has ignored and fact that the claim is for a sum of Rs. 3,17,843/-, but the value of the property now sought
to be brought to sale is more than three times and therefore, it is inequitable to bring the property for sale and therefore, prays for allowing the Civil
Revision Petition in the interest of justice.
The plaintiff who instituted the suit in O.S. No. 414 of 1997 on the file of the trial Court has expired and the respondents 1 to 9 in the revision
petition are said to be his legal heirs. It is an axiomatic fact that an Executing Court cannot go behind the tenor of the decree. On the basis of a
preliminary decree being passed in O.S. No. 414 of 1997, the respondents herein have figured as petitioners before the Executing Court in E.P.
No. 195 of 1995 and they are prosecuting the execution proceedings.
The main grievance of the revision petitioners/defendants is that the rate of interest has not been properly calculated by the
respondents/petitioners in execution proceedings and that for a sum of Rs. 27,500- it has been remitted by the revision petitioners have not been
accounted for properly and therefore, before deciding the same, no further proceedings can take place in the Executing Court. If the properties are
brought for sale and if the amount is deposited and at that point of time, it is open to the revision petitioners to raise their pleas (1) in regard to the
rate of interest not having been calculated properly and further, (2). in regard to the alleged payment of Rs. 27,500/- and therefore, in the absence
of any evidence being let in by the revision petitioners before the Executing Court, this Court opines that these matters can be relegated to in the
further proceedings to be taken in E.P. No. 195 of 2005 and at that time, the revision petitioners will have an adequate opportunity to put forward
their pleas and in that view of the matter, the Civil Revision Petition fails and the same is hereby dismissed.
In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is hereby dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. The order passed by the Executing Court
in E.P. No. 195 of 2005 is affirmed by this Court for the reasons assigned in this revision. It is open to the revision
petitioners/respondents/defendants to raise their objections in regard to the improper calculation of interest and also in regard to the alleged
payment of Rs. 27,500/- and they can seek recourse in this regard in the manner known to law, by proving the same to the satisfaction of
Executing Court.