(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to set aside the order passed in E.A.No.135 of 2012 in E.P.No.77 of 2010 in O.S.No.721 of 2008 on the file of the learned Principal District Munsif, Nagercoil, dated 03.09.2012.)

1. This Civil Revision Petition is focussed to get set aside the order passed in E.A.No.135 of 2012 in E.P.No.77 of 2010 in O.S.No.721 of 2008 on the file of the learned Principal District Munsif, Nagercoil, dated 03.09.2012.

2. A summation and summarisation of the germane facts absolutely necessary for the disposal of this Civil Revision Petition would run thus:

(i) The revision petitioner herein filed E.A.No.135 of 2012 seeking the following relief:

"6. In the above circumstances, I pray that this Honourable court be pleased to stay the operation of the order in E.A.No.43/2012 and Staying further execution proceedings in E.P.No.77/2010 in O.S.No.721/2008 of this Honourable Principal District Munsif Court, Nagercoil for one month enabling the petitioner to obtain the copies of order and decreetal order for preferring an appeal before the Honourable Appellate Court. Otherwise the petitioner will be put to irreparable loss and injury." (extracted as such)

(ii) E.A.No.43 of 2012 referred to in the aforesaid prayer was the one filed under Order XXI Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure by the very same revision petitioner herein in E.P.No.77 of 2010 so as to cause obstruction to the E.P. The said E.A.No.43 of 2012 was dismissed, whereupon before the revision petitioner herein could prefer the appeal, the first respondent herein/decree holder was proceeding with the E.P., wherefore, E.A.No.135 of 2012 was filed for staying the E.P. However, the lower Court dismissed the said E.A.No.135 of 2012 also.

3. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the same, this Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India on various grounds.

4. Heard the learned Counsel for the revision petitioner, the learned Counsel for the first respondent and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 2 and 3.

5. The learned Counsel for the revision petitioner would detail and delineate, portray and parody the facts, the warp and woof of the same, would run thus:

The first respondent/decree holder is none but the brother of the revision petitioner and the litigation between them is having a chequered career of its own. There was one partition suit and instead of seeking remedy in the partition suit, the first respondent/decree holder did choose to file a frivolous suit in O.S.No.721 of 2008 which is ex facie and prima facie untenable one. Based on such decree passed in O.S.No.721 of 2008, he sought to get executed the decree by filing E.P.No.77 of 2010 and in that alone, the revision petitioner intervened and caused obstruction. It is also a fact that the revision petitioner filed one other suit in O.S.No.297 of 2010 before the learned II Additional District Munsif, Nagercoil, seeking to get set aside the decree passed in the said O.S.No.721 of 2008 also arraying all the parties in O.S.No.721 of 2008 as defendants therein. As such, the revision petitioner has been made to suffer hell at the hands of the first respondent/decree holder as the revision petitioner is the co-owner of the property referred to in O.S.No.721 of 2008. If no order of stay is granted regarding the execution of E.P.No.77 of 2010 in O.S.No.721 of 2008, then his attempt to assert his right would end in a fiasco and he would be made to suffer a lot. He would also be put to discomfiture and difficulties.

6. Per contra, in a bid to extirpate and pulverise the arguments advanced on the side of the revision petitioner, the learned Counsel for the first respondent/decree holder would pyramid his submissions, which could tersely and briefly be set out thus:

Already E.P.No.77 of 2010 has got terminated as the decree was executed in full and as such, this Civil Revision Petition has become infructuous. The revision petitioner herein after filing O.S.No.297 of 2010 on the file of the learned II Additional District Munsif, Nagercoil, tried to obtain an order of injunction from the Executing Court in E.P.No.77 of 2010 in O.S.No.721 of 2008, but it was dismissed. As such, the very application under Order XXI Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed by the revision petitioner was untenable. Accordingly, he would pray for dismissal of this Civil Revision Petition.

7. The point for consideration is as to whether the the dismissal of the said application in E.A.No.135 of 2012 warrants interference in this Civil Revision Petition

The Point:

8. The above narration of facts would exemplify and demonstrate that there is a long standing dispute between the revision petitioner and the first respondent/decree holder. Now, in order to get the substantive remedy, the revision petitioner filed the suit in O.S.No.297 of 2010 on the file of the learned II Additional District Munsif, Nagercoil and it is for him to get the relief. E.A.No.135 of 2012 is filed for getting an order of stay, but the E.P.No.77 of 2010 itself was terminated. In such a case, it has to be recorded that this Civil Revision Petition has become infructuous.

9. However, the learned Counsel for the revision petitioner would submit that steps are being taken to prefer appeal as against the dismissal order passed in E.A.No.43 of 2012. It is for him to work out his remedy. It is also open for him to seek remedy in O.S.No.297 of 2010 before the learned II Additional District Munsif, Nagercoil.

10. With the above observations, I would like to dismiss this Civil Revision Petition. The point is answered accordingly.

11. In the result, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are dismissed. No costs.

12. On hearing the pronouncement of the order, the learned Counsel for the revision petitioner would pray for issuance of a direction to the learned II Additional District Munsif, Nagercoil, to dispose of the suit in O.S.No.297 of 2010 expeditiously.

13. I could see considerable force in the submission of the learned Counsel for the revision petitioner as it is a crucial suit which has to be dealt with expeditiously so as to resolve the dispute between the parties and accordingly, the learned II Additional District Munsif, Nagercoil, shall do well to see that the suit in O.S.No.297 of 2010 is disposed of within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.