CRP/5208/2026 of Duraisamy Gounder (Died) 1.D.Raman Vs Kasinathan (Died) 1. Nirmala on 15 October 2026

ORDER

The Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order of arrest passed by the Executing Court in E.P.No.53 of 2020 in O.S.No.14 of 1996, dated 07.08.2026.

2. The respondents herein obtained a decree for injunction against the petitioners’ father P.Duraisamy Gounder. Challenging the same, the said P.Duraisamy Gounder filed second appeals in S.A.Nos.830, 831 and 832 of 2009. Pending second appeals filed by him challenging the decree, he died and the petitioners, who are all his legal representatives have taken steps to get the second appeals restored, which were dismissed as abated and to record them as legal heirs. In the meantime, the respondents filed arrest execution petition on the ground that the petitioners violated the decree for injunction. The Executing Court, on enquiry found substance in the claim made by the respondents and ordered arrest. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have come before this Court.

( Uploaded on: 23/10/2026 12:04:47 pm )

CRP.No.5208 of 2026

3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the petitioners filed an Undertaking Affidavit, dated 14.10.2026 before this Court stating that they will not interfere with the possession of the respondents in respect of the suit property in O.S.No.14 of 1996 on the file of the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Vaniyambadi. The relevant averment made in the undertaking affidavit reads as follows:- “6. We further undertake that we will not interfere with the possession of Respondents in the schedule mentioned property mentioned in the Judgment and Decree in O.S.No.14 of 1996 on the file of District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Vaniyambadi, dated 27.02.2023.”

4. It is further stated in the undertaking affidavit that undertaking given by the petitioners is subject to their right to prosecute the petitions filed by them to restore the Second Appeals, which have been dismissed as abated and their right in the Second Appeals on merits.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 would submit that the respondents 1 to 4 will be satisfied if this Undertaking Affidavit of the petitioners is recorded by this Court.

( Uploaded on: 23/10/2026 12:04:47 pm )

CRP.No.5208 of 2026

6. In view of the same, the undertaking given by the petitioners in Paragraph No.6 of the Undertaking Affidavit extracted above, is recorded. However, it is made clear that the undertaking given by the petitioners is subject to the right of the petitioners to prosecute the petitions filed by them to set aside the abatement of the second appeals filed by their predecessor-in-interest/P.Duraisamy Gounder in S.A.Nos.830, 831 and 832 of 2009 and also any judgment and decree to be passed in the Second Appeals, in case of its restoration.

7. In case, the undertaking given by the petitioners is violated, the respondents are at liberty to workout all the remedies available under law, including initiation of contempt proceedings, subject to result of above mentioned second appeals.

8. With this clarifications, the Civil Revision Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 15-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No dm

( Uploaded on: 23/10/2026 12:04:47 pm )

CRP.No.5208 of 2026

To The District Munsif Court, Vaniyambadi.

( Uploaded on: 23/10/2026 12:04:47 pm )

CRP.No.5208 of 2026

S.SOUNTHAR J. dm CRP.No.5208 of 2026 and CMP.No.22667 of 2026 15-10-2026

( Uploaded on: 23/10/2026 12:04:47 pm )