Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 56041 (MAD)

The Pernambut Muslim Educational Society v. D.M.Krishnan

CRP/4268/2026 · 2026-07-27

P B Balaji

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRP No. 4268 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 27-07-2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI CRP No. 4268 of 2026 1. The Pernambut Muslim Educational Society Rep. by its secretary Ahamed Basha, S/o.Abdul Qaiyum, Chowk Road, Pernambut, Gudiyatham TK, Vellore District. Petitioner(s) Vs 1. D.M.Krishnan S/o.Batakuttipalli Abboy @ Munnisamy, No.48, High Road (Chowk Road), Pernambut Town and Taluk. Respondent(s) Revision filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India as against EP No.74 of 2016 in O.S.No.84 of 2991 pending on the file of District Munsif, Gudiyattam. For Petitioner(s): A.Murali ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No. 4268 of 2026 2. The petitioner’s Society, claiming to be the absolute owner of the suit property, filed a suit for recovery of possession after having been unsuccessful in Rent ontrol Proceedings under the earlier enactment Act viz., Tamil Nadu Buildings ( Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 since repealed. The suit was decreed and the respondent’s appeal was also dismissed as early as on 11.04.2017. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite execution petition being filed in the year 2016 in EP No.74 of 2016, for more than a decade, the execution petition is kept pending. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rahul S. Shah vs Jinendra Kumar Gandhi and Others reported in (2021) 6 SCC 418 has directed that all execution petitions should be disposed of within a period of six months. 3. Considering the fact that the petitioner despite the decree in its favour has not been able to execute the decree for over ten years, I am inclined to issue suitable direction to the executing court. Considering the limited relief sought for in this revision, notice to the respondent is dispensed with since this order does not in any manner prejudice the respondent. 4. The executing Court/District Munsif Court, Gudiyattam is directed to decide EP No.74 of 2016 in O.S.No.84 of 1991 on merits and in accordance with law on 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No. 4268 of 2026 or before 30.09.2026. 5. With the above direction, the civil revision petition is allowed. No costs. 27.07.2026 sr Index:yes/no Website:yes/no Speaking Order/Non-speaking Order To The District Munsif Court, Gudiyattam 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No. 4268 of 2026 P.B.BALAJI.,J sr CRP No. 4268 of 2026 27.07.2026 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis