CRP/6166/2025 of Govindan Vs N.Thulasingam on 27 October 2026

Order

This Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the Executing Court allowing the application filed by the respondent decree holder seeking amendment of the Execution Petition.

2. The respondent herein obtained a decree for declaration and recovery of possession in O.S.No.2 of 2014 on the file of III Additional District Judge, Puducherry. The said decree was ordered to be executed vide order dated 31.10.2025 in E.P.No.156 of 2023. When the delivery warrant sought to be executed by the Court Amin, he found that there was some discrepancy in the village number and hence, returned the warrant mentioning the discrepancy. Thereafter, the respondent herein filed amendment application seeking to amend the village number as 37 instead of 44. The amendment application was allowed by the Executing Court and aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have come before this Court.

3. The learned counsel counsel appearing for the petitioners assailed the impugned order on the following two grounds:

(i) The respondent is not entitled to amend the execution petition without amending the decree; __________

( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 06:04:55 pm )

CRP No. 6166 of 2025

(ii) The Executing Court without giving any opportunity to the petitioner/respondent in amendment application to file counter, allowed the amendment application.

4. It is seen from the records, the amendment application has been filed by the respondent only on 31.10.2025. The impugned order allowing the amendment application has been passed on the very same date without affording any opportunity to the petitioner/respondent therein to file counter to the amendment application.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent vehemently contended that the counsel on record appearing for the petitioners before the Executing Court failed to raise any objections and hence, the amendment application was allowed.

6. In the impugned order, the Executing Court did not record as if, the counsel for the respondent therein had expressed no objection for allowing the application. In such circumstances, the arguments made by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the counsel for the petitioners herein never objected to the amendment application could not be accepted. Further, it is also admitted that the respondent/decree holder has not filed any application to amend the village number in the decree. Without amending the village number in the __________

( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 06:04:55 pm )

CRP No. 6166 of 2025 decree, the respondent is not entitled to amend the Execution Petition. Therefore, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the file of Executing Court with a direction to give opportunity to the petitioners herein/respondents therein to file their objection to the amendment application and dispose of the same in accordance with law without being influenced by anything said in this order.

7. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous Petition is closed. 27-10-2026 Index : Yes Speaking order:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes ub __________

( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 06:04:55 pm )

CRP No. 6166 of 2025 To The III Additional District Judge, Puducherry. __________

( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 06:04:55 pm )

CRP No. 6166 of 2025 S.SOUNTHAR J. ub CRP No.6166 of 2025 27-10-2026 __________

( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 06:04:55 pm )