Pursuant to the final decree passed in the suit in O.S.No.642 of 1969, it is found that execution proceedings, in E.P.No.87 of 2007, have been laid by the respondents 1 to 4 and in the said execution proceedings, various contentions have been raised by the petitioners herein and others, including the question of limitation for filing the execution petition and the Court below, on a consideration of the materials placed and the rival contentions put forth by the respective parties, held that the execution petition is not barred by limitation and accordingly, ordered delivery of the plot to the respondents 1 to 4 as per the final decree passed in the suit. Impugning the same, the present civil revision petition has been preferred.
2. It is mainly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the execution petition is not filed in time and the respondents 1 to 4 cannot take advantage of the proceedings laid in O.S.No.390 of 1978, whereunder, they had given an undertaking that they will not execute the final decree till the culmination of the suit proceedings in O.S.No.390 of 1978. Further, it is found that the petitioners are not parties to the suit proceedings is O.S.No.390 of 1978.
3. However, considering the materials placed and also the impugned order, it is found that inasmuch as a challenge has been made to the decree passed in O.S.No.642 of 1969 in O.S.No.390 of 1978, the respondents 1 to 4 have given an undertaking to the Court that they will not execute the final decree till the disposal of the proceedings in O.S.No.390 of 1978 as such, it is found that the time taken for the disposal of O.S.No.390 of 1978 could be excluded, while computing the period of limitation for filing the execution petition. Accordingly, it is found that after the disposal of O.S.No.390 of 1978, the respondents 1 to 4 have laid the execution petition. Further, the contention put forth by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are not parties to the suit proceedings in O.S.No.390 of 1978 also cannot be sustained . As rightly observed by the Trial Court, when the present suit has been laid for redemption and partition, the petitioners cannot lay the execution proceedings as against certain individuals alone leaving the other individuals involved in the matter and also only in respect of certain properties. Accordingly, it is found by the Court below that the execution petition is filed in time and not barred by limitation. In such view of the matter, I do not find any error in entertaining the execution petition and in the impugned order ordering delivery of the property concerned to the respondents 1 to 4 as per the final decree passed in the suit.
4. In view of the above position, the civil revision petition does not merit acceptance and accordingly the same is dismissed. Consequently, connected civil miscellaneous petition is closed.
To:
The Principal District Munsif, Kuzhithurai.
.