Madras High Court
CRP(MD)/1996/2026 of Hari Gopalakrishnan Vs Sathyamoorthy on 1 September 2026
CRP(MD)No.1996 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 01/09/2026
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.POORNIMA
CRP(MD)No.1996 of 2026
and
CMP(MD)No.9506 of 2026
Hari Gopalakrishnan : Petitioner/Petitioner/Respondent/
Defendant
Vs.
Sathyamoorthy : Respondent/Respondent/Petitioner/
Plaintiff
PRAYER: This Civil Revision has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to direct the learned Sub Judge, Padmanabhapuram, Kanyakumari District, to number the unnumbered E.A- of 2026 in EP No.56 of 2018 in OS No.220 of 2024 on the file of the Sub Court, Padmanabhapuram.
For Petitioner
: Mr.G.Ramanathan
For Respondent : Mr.M.Antony Rajadurai
for M/s.Roy and Roy Associates
( Uploaded on: 03/09/2026 02:53:13 pm )
CRP(MD)No.1996 of 2026
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.
O R D E R
This Civil Revision Petition is filed to direct the learned Sub Judge, Padmanabhapuram, Kanyakumari District, to number the unnumbered E.A.- of 2026 in E.P.No.56 of 2018 in O.S.No.220 of 2014, on the file of the Sub Court, Padmanabhapuram.
2. The petitioner filed the impugned petition under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking leave to pay an initial amount of Rs.25,000/- and a monthly amount of Rs.12,500/- to the E.P. petitioner until the realisation of the decree amount. The petitioner is the judgment- debtor. The decree-holder filed the suit in O.S.No.220 of 2014 for recovery of money.
3. The contention of the petitioner is that he did not contest the suit and was set ex-parte on 02/06/2017 and, consequently, an ex-parte decree was passed against him. Subsequently, the decree-holder filed an execution petition seeking his arrest and the same was allowed. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed C.R.P.(MD)No.851 of 2023, which was also dismissed on 16/06/2026. Now, the execution petition is pending for arrest. In the meantime, the petitioner filed a petition seeking
( Uploaded on: 03/09/2026 02:53:13 pm )
CRP(MD)No.1996 of 2026 permission to pay the decree amount by way of instalments. However, without numbering the same, the learned Trial Court returned the petition stating that there was no direction by the Decree Court permitting payment by instalments and that notice had not been served on the other side.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that notice had already been served on the respondent and relied upon Order XX Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which reads as under:- “11. Decree may direct payment by instalments.— (1).Where and in so far as a decree is for the payment of money, the Court may, for any sufficient reason, incorporate in the decree, after hearing such of the parties who had appeared personally or by pleader at the last hearing before judgment, an order that payment of the amount decreed shall be postponed or shall be made by instalments, with or without interest, notwithstanding anything contained in the contract under which the money is payable. (2).Order, after decree, for payment by instalments.—After the passing of any such decree, the Court may, on the application of the judgment-debtor and with the consent of the decree-holder, order that payment of the amount decreed shall be postponed or shall be made by instalments on such terms as to the payment of interest, the attachment of the property of the judgment-debtor, or the taking of security from him, or otherwise, as it thinks fit.”
( Uploaded on: 03/09/2026 02:53:13 pm )
CRP(MD)No.1996 of 2026
5. On perusal of the records, it is seen that the petitioner had not initially mentioned the proper provision of law under which the petition had been filed. It is also seen that notice has now been served on the respondent/decree-holder.
6. In view of the above, the learned Execution Court is directed to number the petition and issue notice to the respondent/decree-holder and ascertain whether he is willing to the payment of the decree amount by way of instalments and, thereafter, pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law.
7. The petitioner states that he has already deposited a sum of Rs.3,75,000/- as directed by this Court. The petitioner is directed to produce the records evidencing such deposit before the learned Execution Court. The decree-holder is at liberty to withdraw the said amount by filing an appropriate application before the learned Execution Court. The Registry is directed to return the original impugned order to the learned counsel for the petitioner, after retaining a copy of the same.
( Uploaded on: 03/09/2026 02:53:13 pm )
CRP(MD)No.1996 of 2026
8. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
01.09.2026 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No er
( Uploaded on: 03/09/2026 02:53:13 pm )
CRP(MD)No.1996 of 2026 R.POORNIMA, J. er To, The Sub Court, Padmanabhapuram.
CRP(MD)No.1996 of 2026 01/09/2026
( Uploaded on: 03/09/2026 02:53:13 pm )