Madras High Court
CRP/4111/2022 of M.KESAVAN Vs ANBU KANNAN on 14 October 2026
CRP No. 4111 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 14-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SOUNTHAR
CRP No. 4111 of 2022
CNR: {HCMA011946512022}
M.Kesavan
S/o Manickam, No 8-A, Sivan Koil, West Mada Street, Villivakkam, Chennai 49.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. Anbu Kannan
S/o Mohan, No 66, Bagawathi Amman Koil
Street, Kolathur, Chennai 600 099.
2. Mallika
W/o Devan No 8, Sivan Koil West Mada Street, Villivakkam, Chennai 49.
3. Vijayasarathi
S/o Mohan, No 66, Bagawati Amman Koil Street, Kolathur, Chennai 600 099.
..Respondent(s)
Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of CPC to set aside the Order and Decree in EP.No. 2477 of 2016 in OS.No. 2878 of 2005 dated 07.07.2022 passed by the XXV Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai For Petitioner(s):
Mr. R.Thanigaiarasu
For Respondent(s):
Mr.A.Palaniappan for R2
R1 and R3 – No appearance
CRP No. 4111 of 2022
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 has been filed challenging the order passed by the Executing Court, dismissing the execution petition filed by the petitioner.
2. The petitioner herein/plaintiff obtained a decree for injunction against the respondents/defendants. The petitioner, alleging violation of the said decree by the respondents, filed an execution petition seeking arrest of the respondents. The Executing Court has dismissed the execution petition and aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has come before this court.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Executing Court, without appreciating the documents marked on the side of the petitioner, has erroneously dismissed the execution petition on the ground that the alleged disobedience has not been proved by the petitioner.
4. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondents violated the decree for injunction passed against them. Hence, he lodged a police complaint against the respondents in the year 2008 and 2016 and the CSR receipts issued by the police have also been marked as Ex.P1 and P2. According to the
CRP No. 4111 of 2022 petitioner, the Executing Court, without appreciating the above said documents, has dismissed the execution petition.
5. It is seen from the impugned order that the petitioner/plaintiff preferred a complaint to the jurisdictional police station on 05.04.2008 and 23.09.2016, alleging violation of the decree by the respondents/judgment debtors and the police issued the CSR receipts. However, the further course of action taken by the police is not available before the court. The petitioner also produced photographs in order to prove the violation. From the photographs produced by the petitioner, it may not be possible to the court to come to the conclusion that there was a violation of the decree for injunction by the respondents.
6. In order to prove the alleged violation, the petitioner himself was examined as PW1. However, for the reasons best known to him, the petitioner has not examined any independent witness, like neighbours to prove the alleged violation. In the absence of any concrete evidence to prove the alleged disobedience of the decree, only based on the interested testimony of the petitioner, it cannot be presumed that the petitioner has proved the alleged violation by the respondents and order their arrest. The Executing Court has rightly appreciated the evidence available on record and came to the conclusion
CRP No. 4111 of 2022 that the disobedience of the decree by the respondents has not been proved by the petitioner and dismissed the execution petition. I do not find any error in the impugned order passed by the Trial Court.
7. Accordingly, this civil revision petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. It is made clear that the dismissal of the civil revision petition will not come in the way of the petitioner approaching the executing court, in case, there is any violation in future. 14-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No MST To The XXV Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.
CRP No. 4111 of 2022 S.SOUNTHAR, J. MST CRP No. 4111 of 2022 14-10-2026