Madras High Court
CRP/4067/2024 of CHINNATHAMBI Vs PANDURANGAN on 18 August 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 18-08-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI
CRP Nos. 4067 and 4068 of 2024 and
CMP Nos.22384 and 22389 of 2024
Chinnathambi
S/o. Ramasamy Gounder,
Kottavur Village, Kuppanatham Post,
Chengam Tk, Tiruvannamalai Dt.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
Pandurangan, S/o. Mottaiya Gounder,
Kottavur Village, Kuppanatham Post,
Chengam Tk, Tiruvannamalai Dt.
..Respondent(s)
Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of CPC to set aside the fair and decreetal orders dated 27.06.2024 passed in EA No.6 and 7 of 2019
in EP No.82 of 2010 in OS No.290 of 2004 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Chengam.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr. P. Mani
For Respondent(s):
R.Rajarajan
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.
COMMON ORDER
These Civil Revision Petition have been filed to set aside the fair and decreetal orders dated 27.06.2024 passed in EA No.6 and 7 of 2019 in EP No.82 of 2010 in OS No.290 of 2004 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Chengam.
2. Heard Mr.P.Mani, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.R.Rajaram, learned counsel for the respondent.
3. An application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking restoration of execution petition, that was dismissed for default, has been allowed by the executing court. Challenging the same, the present civil revision petitions have been filed by the judgment debtor.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that Order 21 Rule CPC, an application under Rule 106(3) CPC has to be filed within a period of 30 days and there is no provision for condonation of delay. He would therefore state that the very application seeking condonation of 388 days delay was not maintainable. He would relied on the recent decision of this court in Sundarammal and 2 others Vs. Kanagaran and another reported in 2025(4) CTC 225. The learned counsel would also point out that though interlocutory execution application was all along pending, simultaneously, E.P. was also listed for enquiry and therefore, on the date, when the E.P. was dismissed, even though E.A.No.18 of 2014 also came to be dismissed, by then enquiry being contemplated in the E.P, it would squarely fall within the ratio laid down by this court in Sundarammal case.
5. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent/decree holder would state that the execution petition was not posted for hearing, on the date on which it came to be dismissed. In this regard, the learned counsel relies on the very same judgment passed by this court in Sundarammal’s case, where, exceptions have been carved out. At paragraph No.52 of the said order in the revision petition, this court has protected the interest of genuine litigants, who should not suffer prejudice or be caused injustice. The respondent’s case is that the E.P. was not listed for hearing on the date on which it was dismissed for non prosecution.
6. In this regard, I have gone through the adjudication of the execution petition on various dates. The copy of the amended execution petition has been filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner for ready reference of this court. Right from 2012, though the E.P. was posted for enquiry, thereafter, it is noticed that execution applications were filed in 2013 and I find that on 24.06.2013, notifying that the Insolvency Petition was dismissed as against the judgment debtor, the petitioner was entitled to attachment and by order dated 29.07.2013, the executing court had directed the batta to be filed in three days and thereafter, posted the matter to 30.08.2013. In the interregnum period, execution applications were filed by the petitioner/judgment debtor and the petitioner also filed E.A.No.18/2014 seeking amendment of the execution petition. The said E.A.No.18 of 2014 was dismissed for non-representation and consequently, on the very same day, the E.P. also came to be dismissed. The Executing Court has found that the E.P was not listed for enquiry and only on account of default for non appearance on the side of the counsel for the respondent, E.P. had been dismissed. The Executing Court therefore, exercised its discretion and condoned the delay on payment of Rs.2,000/-
7. The learned counsel for the respondent is unable to assert whether the said costs of Rs.2,000/- was paid or deposited in time, as directed by the learned court by order dated 27.06.2024.
8. On consideration of the facts and circumstances discussed herein above and also the reasons assigned by the court in condoning the delay of 388 days, I am satisfied that the Executing Court has brought the case, within the exceptions, which has been carved out in the Sundarammal’s case. I do not find any illegality or perversity in the order, allowing the Section 5 application. However, at the same time, prejudice caused to the respondent has to be suitably compensated.
9. In the light of the above discussion, this civil revision petition is dismissed with the following directions:-
i) The respondent shall pay a cost of Rs.5,000/- , excluding the amount of Rs.2,000/- that was directed to be paid and if not paid a total sum of Rs.7,000/- shall be paid either to the counsel for the revision petitioner here, or the counsel for the Judgment Debtor, before the Executing Court, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
ii) Subject to such compliance, the Execution Petition shall stand restored and shall be decided in accordance with law, within a period of 4 months thereafter. There shall be no order as to costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 18-08-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No MST To The District Munsif, Chengam.
P.B.BALAJI, J. MST CRP No. 4067 of 2024 18-08-2026