CRP/6075/2026 of M.S.Shanmugam Vs Balakumar on 22 September 2026

ORDER

This revision petition has been filed to dispose of E.A.No.03 of 2020 in E.P.No.540 of 2018 on the file of the XIV Small Causes Court, Chennai, to deliver possession after removing the respondent from the premises Old Door No.27, New Door No.8, Muthu Mudali Street, Purasawalkam, Chennai – 600

007. ( Uploaded on: 25/09/2026 12:06:14 pm )

2. Heard Mr.T.R.Rajaraman, learned counsel for the revision petitioner.

3. Considering the limited relief sought for in the revision petition, I am inclined to dispense with notice to the respondent.

4. The revision petitioner is the landlord, who has succeeded in rent control proceedings, as well as the civil suits up to the Hon’ble Supreme Court. One Balakumar, the 1st respondent herein has created obstructions, preventing the petitioner from executing the decree for eviction in his favour. In fact, the 1st respondent has been a party respondent even in proceedings before this Court, as well as before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner invites my attention to the order passed in CRP.(NPD).No.5107 of 2024 dated 11.12.2024, which was a revision at the instance of the 1st respondent, Balakumar, where this Court found that the said Balakumar had no right in the property and he is only a representative of the judgment debtor and the judgment against the judgment debtor would bind the 1st respondent herein.

6. In yet another civil revision petition filed by the revision petitioner in CRP.No.1120 of 2026, this Court, by order dated 25.06.2026, after hearing the

( Uploaded on: 25/09/2026 12:06:14 pm )

1st respondent, who appeared as party in person restored the eviction order in RCOP.No.1523 of 2024 and also imposed a cost of Rs.50,000/- on the respondent party in person. Now, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that despite all these adverse orders and observations against the 1st respondent, the 1st respondent is continuing to protract the execution proceedings and is attempting the obstruct the delivery of possession in favour of the revision petitioner, who is a senior citizen aged more than 80 years.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner also states that when the matter was last listed two weeks ago, the Executing Court has indicated that the 1st respondent is willing to settle the matter and the matter can be referred to the mediation returnable by 28.09.2026. When the revision petitioner, who has succeeded up to the Hon’ble Supreme Court and despite specific directions issued by this Court not once, but on two occasions, the Executing Court cannot expect the petitioner to sit for mediation talks with the 1st respondent. It is a clear attempt on the part of the 1st respondent to protract the proceedings and gain further time. The Executing Court is therefore directed to dispose of the obstruction application and also the main EP on or before 16.10.2026 and ensure that the decree is satisfied in line with the directions already issued by this Court in the above referred two revision petitions.

( Uploaded on: 25/09/2026 12:06:14 pm )

8. With the above direction, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed. No costs. 22-09-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No ATA To The XIV Small Causes Court, Chennai.

( Uploaded on: 25/09/2026 12:06:14 pm )

P.B.BALAJI, J. ATA CRP No. 6075 of 2026 22-09-2026

( Uploaded on: 25/09/2026 12:06:14 pm )