Madras High Court
CRP/5115/2026 of Vijayakumar Vs Gandhi on 6 October 2026
CRP.No.5115 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 06-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SOUNTHAR
CRP.No.5115 of 2026
CNR:{HCMA011737662026}
and
CMP.No.22342 of 2026
Vijayakumar
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
Gandhi
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to strike off/quash the execution proceedings in E.P.No.44 of 2024 in O.S.No.231 of 2020 on the file Principal Sub Court, Tiruvannamalai.
For Petitioner
: Mr.R.Senthilkumar
For Respondent
: Mr.M.R.Radhakrishnan
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 is filed seeking to strike off the execution petition filed by the respondent in E.P.No.44 of 2024 in O.S.No.231 of 2020 on the file Principal Sub Court, Tiruvannamalai.
CRP.No.5115 of 2026
2. It is not in dispute that the respondent herein obtained an exparte decree for recovery of money from the petitioner. The same is put into execution in E.P.No.44 of 2024. The petitioner/judgment debtor filed the instant revision petition seeking to strike of the execution petition mainly on the ground that the petitioner already filed an application to set aside the exparte decree along with the condone delay petition.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would vehemently contend that the petition to condone the delay in filing petition to set aside the exparte decree already allowed and the application for setting aside the exparte decree is pending adjudication. In such circumstances, according to the counsel, the respondent is not entitled to proceed with execution petition.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that the petition to set aside the exparte decree filed by the petitioner has already been dismissed.
CRP.No.5115 of 2026
5. Merely because, the petition to set aside the exparte decree filed by the petitioner is pending adjudication, the petitioner cannot say that the respondent/decree holder is not entitled to execute the decree. Unless the petitioner gets an order of stay from concerned Court, the petitioner is not entitled to state that the execution petition shall be struck off. It is settled law that exparte decree can also be executed. In the absence of any stay order by the Court of competence jurisdiction, the respondent is entitled to proceed with the execution petition. Hence, I do not find anything to strike off the execution petition filed by the respondent.
6. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 06-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No dm To The Principal Sub Court, Tiruvannamalai.
CRP.No.5115 of 2026
S.SOUNTHAR J. dm CRP.No.5115 of 2026 and CMP.No.22342 of 2026 06-10-2026