Madras High Court
CRP/4595/2026 of THE PERNAMBUT MUSLIM EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY Vs 1. Vellai (Deceased) 1. Manigandan on 10 September 2026
CRP No. 4595 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10-09-2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI
CRP No. 4595 of 2026
1. The Pernambut Muslim Educational
Society
Rep. by its President Ahamed Basha, S/o.
Abdul Qaiyum Chowk Road, Pernambut,
Vellore District.
Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. 1. Vellai (Deceased) 1. Manigandan
S/o. Vellai, Chowk Road, Pernambut,
Vellore District.
2.Kavitha
D/o. Vellai, Chowk Road, Pernambut,
Vellore District.
3.Rajiv Gandhi
S/o. Vellai, Chowk Road, Pernambut,
Vellore District.
4.The District Collector of Vellore
Collectorate Buildings, Sathuvachari,
Vellore.
5.The Thasildar
Pernambut Taluk, Pernambut, Vellore
District.
Respondent(s)
CRP No. 4595 of 2026
Revision filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India against E.P No.77 of 2016 in O.S.No.87 of 1991 pending on the file of District Munsif, Gudiyattam.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.A.Murali
For Respondent(s):
Mr.P.Sunil
Govt.Advocate
For R.4 and R.5
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
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
The revision petitioner is the decree holder, who has filed execution proceedings, way back in the year 2016, for recovery of possession from the respondents/tenants.
2. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite passage of ten years, the petitioner is unable to enjoy the fruits of the decree in their favour. In fact, the learned counsel for the petitioner also brought to my notice, an order passed by me on 27.07.2026 in CRP No.4268 of 2026, where, as against a similarly placed tenant, I directed the execution proceedings to be disposed of on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of two months.
CRP No. 4595 of 2026
3. In the present revision also, the revision is against the tenants who suffered an order of recovery of possession. The appeal filed by the respondents has also been dismissed and the matter has attained finality. Despite concurrent findings and decree in favour of the revision petitioner/decree holder, the petitioner is not able to recover possession of the property belonging to him absolutely.
4. In the light of the above and considering the limited relief sought for in this revision, I am inclined to dispense with notice to the respondents.
5. Keeping in mind the recent decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Periyammal (Dead Thr. Lrs.) vs V. Rajamani and Anr. etc, reported in, 2025 (2) CTC 404 and Rahul S. Shah v. Jinendra Kumar Gandhi, reported in AIR 2021 SC 216, directing all Execution Petitions to be disposed of within a period of six months, the executing Court is directed to dispose of EP No.77 of 2016 on merits and in accordance with law on or before 30.11.2026, without seeking any further extension of time. 10.09.2026 sr Index:yes/no Website:yes/no Speaking Order/Non-speaking Order
CRP No. 4595 of 2026 P.B.BALAJI.,J sr To The District Munsif Court, Gudiyattam. CRP No. 4595 of 2026 10.09.2026