Madras High Court
CRP/1135/2024 of J.KANDHAPRAVEEN Vs P.MUTHUSAMY GOUNDER on 7 October 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 07-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
Civil Revision Petition No.1135 of 2024
and
C.M.P.No.5886 of 2024
CNR: {HCMA010461652024}
1. J.Kandhapraveen
S/o.P.K.Jayaprakash
2. K.Hemalatha
W/o.Kandhapraveen
3. J.Bhuvaneshwari
W/o.Jayaprakash
4. P.K.Jayaprakash
S/o.Kandasamy
..Petitioners
Vs
1. P.Muthusamy Gounder
S/o.Palanisamy Gounder
2. The Corporation Bank,
represented by its Branch Manager,
No.4, Mangalam Road,
Tirupur-641 604.
(Union Bank of India Amended as per order in
I.A.No.500/2021)
..Respondents
Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order made in I.A.No.239 of 2020 in O.S.No.323 of 2019 dated 03.01.2024 on the file of Principal Subordinate Judge, Tiruppur.
For Petitioners :
Mr.C.Veera Raghavan
For Respondents :
Mr.K.Myilsamy [R1]
Mr.L.Sriram
for M/s.Chennai Law Firm [R2]
*****
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 under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 03.01.2024 passed in I.A.No.239 of 2020 in O.S.No.323 of 2019 by the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Tiruppur, wherein the application filed by the petitioners/defendants for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to sell the immovable properties available in the suit premises, came to be rejected by the Court below.
2. Heard learned counsel on either side and carefully perused the materials available on record. This Court also went through the impugned order.
3. The first respondent/plaintiff has filed the suit in O.S.No.323 of 2019 seeking for the relief of recovery of arrears of rent along with interest. During the pendency of the suit, I.A.No.239 of 2020 in O.S.No.323 of 2019 was filed by petitioners/defendants for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to sell the machineries/movables available at the suit property and to deposit the sale proceeds into the Court account. This application was dismissed by the Court below.
4. It is seen from the order passed by the Court below that the original machineries were mortgaged with the second respondent bank and subsequently, the loan amount was settled by the petitioners/defendants and the bank also made an endorsement to the effect that the entire loan amount has been paid by petitioners and as such, the machineries have been discharged from the mortgage. In view of the same, the Court below held that there is no impediment for the petitioners to sell the machineries and to deposit the sale proceeds before the Court.
5. The above order passed by the Court below does not suffer from any perversity warranting interference of this Court. In fact, the first respondent/plaintiff had sought for attachment of movable properties by filing an interlocutory application and the same came to be rejected by the Court below. Therefore, as rightly held by the Court below, if the petitioners/defendants want to settle the amount, they themselves can sell the movable properties and deposit the sale proceeds to the account of the suit. There is no need for appointing an Advocate Commissioner for this purpose, that too, in a suit, filed by the first respondent/plaintiff.
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J. gm In the result, the impugned order is sustained and this civil revision petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 07-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No gm To The Principal Subordinate Judge, Tiruppur. Civil Revision Petition No.1135 of 2024