Madras High Court
CRP(MD)/2665/2016 of GANESAN Vs RAZIA BANU on 29 December 2016
THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 29.12.2016 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.2665 of 2016 and C.M.P(MD)No.12517 of 2016 Ganesan ..Petitioner/Landlord -vs- Razia Banu .. Respondent/Decree Holder PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 29.12.2016
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM
C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.2665 of 2016and
C.M.P(MD)No.12517 of 2016
Ganesan
-vs-
..Petitioner/Landlord
Razia Banu
.. Respondent/Decree Holder
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of theCode of Civil Procedure to set aside the order and decree dated26.10.2016 made in E.P.No.102 of 2009 in R.C.O.P.No.5 of 2002 onthe file of the Rent Controller cum Principal District Munsif,Kumbakonam.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Gomathisankar
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
This Civil Revision Petition arises out of the order passed inE.P.No.102 of 2009 in R.C.O.P.No.5 of 2002 on the file of the RentController cum Principal District Munsif, Kumbakonam.
2. The respondent as landlord initiated eviction proceedingsagainst the petitioner in R.C.O.P.No.5 of 2002. After contest,the learned Rent Controller, ordered eviction, which was confirmedby the appellate authority. Challenging the concurrent finding,the petitioner seems to have filed the revision in C.R.P(MD)No.2603 of 2010. Based on the eviction order, therespondent/landlord laid an execution petition in the year 2009.Since there is no stay in the revision, the Executing Court hasordered delivery. Challenging the said order, the present CivilRevision Petition is filed.
3. Heard Mr.G.Gomathisankar, learned counsel for the petitionerand perused the records.
4. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has preferred therevision against the concurrent finding. Though this Court hasgranted interim stay for limited period in the year 2010, theorder was not extended subsequently. Hence, the Executing Courthttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ordered delivery by observing that there is no stay of executionof the decree.
5. In view of the above facts, I do not find any merit in thisrevision.
6. In the result, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed.The Executing Court is directed to dispose of the E.P.No.102 of2009 in R.C.O.P.No.5 of 2002, within a period of two months fromthe date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.
/True copy/
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar (T&P)
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
The Rent Controller cum Principal District Munsif, Kumbakonam.
C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.2665 of 2016
and
C.M.P(MD)No.12517 of 201629.12.2016
sknSH:10.01.2017:2P/2C