Bavani v. Ramasubbu,

J U D G M E N T The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the fair and decreetal order, dated 18.06.2026 passed in E.A.No.6 of 2025 in E.P.No.15 of 2020 in O.S.No.84 of 2016 on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Court, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur, dismissing the petition filed under Section 47 of C.P.C.

¶2The learned Judge, Executing Court has specifically observed that though the petition was filed under Section 47 of the C.P.C., it is a claim petition under Order XXI, Rule 58 of C.P.C, and on that basis, proceeded with the enquiry.

¶3It is not in dispute that the third respondent executed a mortgage deed on behalf of the second respondent-mother in favour of the first respondent and since the mortgage debt was not repaid, the first respondent filed a suit in O.S.No.84 of 2026 and preliminary decree came to be passed; that since the preliminary decree was not complied with, the first respondent has initiated the final decree proceedings and obtained final decree and that subsequently, for execution of final decree, execution petition was filed and the same is pending.

¶4During the pendency of the execution proceedings, the daughter of the second respondent filed a claim petition alleging that the property is a joint family ancestral property and that she is entitled to 1/4th share therein. The Executing Court, taking note of the specific admission made by the petitioner herself, held that the property originally belonged to Sankaramoorthy Naidu, that K.P. Tirumalai was his adopted son and that the said K.P. Tirumalai alone inherited the property.

¶5Moreover, the Executing Court has extracted the cross examination evidence of P.W.1, " ehd; jhf;fy; nra;Js;s rhl;rpa gpukhz gj;jpupf;ifapy; FLk;gj;jpy; ghj;jpag;gl;l midj;J nrhj;Jf;fisAk; vd; jfg;gdhUf;F jdpj;J ghj;jpag;gl;lJ vd;W nrhy;yp mtu; fpiuak; Nkw;nfhz;Ls;shu; vd;W ehd; nrhy;ypAs;Nsd; vd;why; rupjhd;. me;j fpiuajhuu;fs; kPJ ehd; ve;j tof;Fk; jhf;fy; nra;atpy;iy vd;why; rupjhd;. ,e;j kDtpy; fz;Ls;s nrhj;jhdJ vd; jfg;gdhUf;F jdpj;J ghj;jpag;gl;l nrhj;J vd;gjhy; mjid mtu; vd; jhahUf;F nrl;by;nkd;l; Mtzk; %ykhf vOjpf;nfhLg;gjw;F mtUf;F cupik cs;sJ vd;why; rupjhd;. vdNt vd; jhahu; ngaupyhd nrl;by;nkd;l; Mtzk; rl;lg;gb nry;Yk; vd;why; rupjhd;";.

¶6The Executing Court, considering the entire evidence has come to the conclusion that the petitioner, in collusion with the mother-third respondent has filed the above claim petition, only to prevent the decree holder from realizing the fruits of the decree and also, held that the petitioner is not entitled to get ¼ share and on that basis, dismissed the petition.

¶7Considering the above, the impugned order dismissing the petition is perfectly in order and the same cannot be found fault with. Consequently, this Court concludes that the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is devoid of merits and the same is liable to be dismissed.

¶8In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.

06.08.2026 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No das To

¶1Additional District and Sessions Court, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur.

2.The Record Keeper, Vernacular Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. K.MURALI SHANKAR,J. das and C.M.P(MD)No.10348 of 2026

06.08.2026

EFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATE : 06.08.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR and C.M.P(MD)No.10348 of 2026 Bavani : Appellant Vs. 1.Ramasubbu 2.Vanaja 3.Sankarasubramaniam : Respondents PRAYER:- Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Order 21 Rule 58(4) of C.P.C., against the fair and decreetal order, dated 18.06.2026 order passed in E.A.No.6 of 2025 in E.P.No.15 of 2020 in O.S.No.84 of 2016 on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Court, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur. For Appellant : Mr.H.Arumugam