CRP No. 2675 of 2025 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 19-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI CRP No. 2675 of 2025 and CMP.No.11713 of 2026 1. Balu S/o. Diagaraja Asari, Res. at No.3, 2nd Cross, Santhi Nagar, Puducherry - 011. 2. Santhi W/o. Balu, Res. at No.3, 2nd Cross, Santhi Nagar, Puducherry - 011. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. Sudhakaran S/o. Pandurangan, No.32 (Upstairs), 3rd Cross Street, Venkita Nagar, Puducherry - 011. 2. Padmavathi W/o. Late R. Sinnaraju Asari, No.18-C, Main Road, Bhuvanagiri, S.A District, Tamil Nadu - 601 Late Veeramani (Died). 3. Rajasekaran S/o. Mani, No.18C, Main Road, Bhuvanagiri, Cuddalore District - 601. 4. Selvi W/o. Veeramani, No.75, Sannathi Street, Tiruvannamalai, Tamil Nadu - 601. 5. Vijaya W/o. Rajasekaran, No.18C, Main Road, Bhuvanagiri, Cuddalore District, Tamil Nadu - 601. 6. Segar No.3, (Upstairs), 2nd Cross, Santhi Nagar, Pondicherry - 011. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No. 2675 of 2025 __________ Page2 of 4 7. Porchezian No.3, (Upstairs), 2nd Cross, Santhi Nagar, Pondicherry - 011. ..Respondent(s) PRAYER Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, praying to set aside the docket order dated 04.04.2025 passed in EA SR No.2273 of 2025 in EP No.124 of 2017 in O.S.No.295 of 2003 by the Learned Principal Sub Judge, Puducherry and allow this CRP. For Petitioner(s): MR.V.S.Senthilkumar For Respondent(s): MR.B.VIJAYA BARATHAN FOR R1 MR.D.PRABU FOR R3 AND R5 NRN-R2,R4,R6 AND R7 ORDER The petitioners have filed this Civil Revision Petition challenging the order dated 04.04.2025 passed by the Principal Sub Judge, Puducherry, in E.A. S.R. No.2273 of 2025 in E.P. No.124 of 2017 in O.S. No.295 of 2003. 2. The petitioners, who are judgment debtors 3 and 6, filed an application before the Executing Court in E.P. No.124 of 2017 seeking dismissal of the execution petition on the ground that the trial Court lacked pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and decide the suit. However, the suit had already been decreed. Aggrieved by the decree, an appeal in A.S. No.19 of 2017 was preferred and the same was also dismissed. Thereafter, a second appeal was https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No. 2675 of 2025 __________ Page3 of 4 filed, but no order of stay has been granted. 3. Further, the petitioners filed an application to reject the execution petition contending that the trial Court lacked pecuniary jurisdiction. On perusal of the records, it is seen that the suit was filed in the year 2003 for declaration, recovery of vacant possession and mesne profits, which were valued at around Rs.1,62,000/-. The suit was decreed and the appeal was dismissed. At the stage of execution, the petitioners have come forward with a new plea regarding the lack of pecuniary jurisdiction of the trial Court, as such also not permissible at the execution stage. Considering the relief of declaration sought in the suit, which was very much maintainable before the Court of law, the Executing Court rightly dismissed the said application without numbering the same. The said order is sustainable in law and requires no interference. 4. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed, being devoid of merits. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 19-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No MPA https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No. 2675 of 2025 __________ Page4 of 4 T.V.THAMILSELVI, J. MPA To 1. The Principal Sub Judge, Puducherry. 2. The Section Officer, VR section, High Court of Madras. CRP No. 2675 of 2025 and CMP.No.11713 of 2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis