E.Radhakrishnan Vs. Nirmala

E.Radhakrishnan vs Nirmala

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jun 28, 2012

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/927356

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/927356
Court: Chennai High Court
Judge: G.Rajasuria, J.
Decided On: Jun 28, 2012
Case Number: C.R.P.(NPD).No.1182 of 2012 and M.P.No.1 of 2012
Subject: Civil

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Civil

Key legal issue: Civil
Acts & sections: Code of Civil Procedure,(CPC) 1908 - Section 47; Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act - Section 23; Constitution of India - Articles 226

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

E.Radhakrishnan

Advocate Mr.K.G.vasudevan, Adv.

Respondent

Nirmala

Legal References

Acts: Code of Civil Procedure,(CPC) 1908 - Section 47; Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act - Section 23; Constitution of India - Articles 226

Excerpt

.....passed by the district munsif court, ambattur, in e.p.no.23 of 2008 in r.c.o.p.no.45 of 2007.order1. animadverting upon the order 23.12.2011 passed by the district munsif court, ambattur, in e.p.no.23 of 2008 in r.c.o.p.no.45 of 2007, this revision petition has been filed.2. the long and short of the germane facts in a few broad stroke can be encapsulated thus:(i) the revision petitioner herein is the 3rd party before the executing court relating to the rent control matters. invoking section 47 of the c.p.c. the petitioner herein filed the e.a.no.123 of 2010 seeking the following relief:"to declare that the order passed by this hon'ble court as un-executable dated in rcop no.45/07 and to dismiss the above e.p.on the file of this hon'ble court."(extracted as such)(ii) after hearing both sides, the said e.a.was dismissed.3. being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said order, invoking article 227 of the constitution of india, this revision has been focussed.4. at the hearing, this court raised the point as to how this revision under article 227 of the constitution is maintainable straight away from the order passed by the executing court relating to the rent control matters.5. this court can take judicial notice of the practice that even in execution proceedings relating to the rent control matters, if any order is passed, the party affected can only under section 23 of the tamil nadu buildings (lease and rent control) act, approach the appellate authority under the rent control act concerned. when such is the scenario, i am at a loss to understand as to how straight away the petitioner could invoke article 227 of the constitution. hence, on that ground, the revision is dismissed. however, there is no order as to costs. consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is dismissed.6. registry shall immediately return the certified copies to the petitioner, so as to enable him to take necessary action.

Full Judgment

Civil revision petition preferred against the order dated 23.12.2011 passed by the District Munsif Court, Ambattur, in E.P.No.23 of 2008 in R.C.O.P.No.45 of 2007.

ORDER

1. Animadverting upon the order 23.12.2011 passed by the District Munsif Court, Ambattur, in E.P.No.23 of 2008 in R.C.O.P.No.45 of 2007, this revision petition has been filed.

2. The long and short of the germane facts in a few broad stroke can be encapsulated thus:

(i) The revision petitioner herein is the 3rd party before the Executing Court relating to the Rent Control matters. Invoking Section 47 of the C.P.C. the petitioner herein filed the E.A.No.123 of 2010 seeking the following relief:

"to declare that the order passed by this Hon'ble Court as un-executable dated in RCOP No.45/07 and to dismiss the above E.P.on the file of this Hon'ble Court."

(extracted as such)

(ii) After hearing both sides, the said E.A.was dismissed.

3. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said order, invoking Article 227 of the Constitution of India, this revision has been focussed.

4. At the hearing, this Court raised the point as to how this revision under Article 227 of the Constitution is maintainable straight away from the order passed by the Executing Court relating to the Rent Control matters.

5. This Court can take judicial notice of the practice that even in execution proceedings relating to the Rent Control matters, if any order is passed, the party affected can only under Section 23 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, approach the appellate authority under the Rent Control Act concerned. When such is the scenario, I am at a loss to understand as to how straight away the petitioner could invoke Article 227 of the Constitution. Hence, on that ground, the revision is dismissed. However, there is no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is dismissed.

6. Registry shall immediately return the certified copies to the petitioner, so as to enable him to take necessary action.

Same Court & Year Chennai · 2012 Same Parties E.Radhakrishnan vs Nirmala Same Subject Civil Same Judge G.Rajasuria, J. Acts & Sections Code of Civil Procedure,(CPC) 1908 - Section 47; Tamil Nadu B...