K.Kannappa Valliappan Karunamoorthy (Died),1.V.Meg vs K.P.Kadieswaran
- Court
- Madras High Court
CRP No. 5691 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Order Reserved on : 25.09.2026
Order Pronounced on : 16.10.2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI
CRP Nos.1487, 5691, 5693 & 5695 of 2026
and CMP.Nos.7108, 24573, 24571 & 24567 of 2026
CNR:{HCMA012112822026}
K.Kannappa Valliappan Karunamoorthy (Died)
1.V.Megalai
2.Karunamoorthy Soundaram
3.Karunamoorthy Saidev
4.Karunamoorthy Jahan Srisainath
..Petitioners in all CRPs
Vs
K.P.Kadieswaran
..Respondent in all
CRPs
CRP No. 1487 of 2026
Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of CPC, to set aside the
order made in EP.No.1770 of 2025 in OS.No.700 of 2023 dated 24-02-2026 on
the file of the X Asst.City Civil Court, Chennai.
CRP No. 5691 of 2026
Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India, to set aside the order made in IA No.6 of 2026 in OS No.700 of 2023
dated 21.08.2026 on the file of the XX Additonal Sessions Court at Allikulam,
Chennai and allow the above Civil Revision Petition.
1
__________
Page1 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/10/2026 04:00:13 pm )
CRP No. 5691 of 2026
CRP No. 5693 of 2026
Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to
set aside the order made in IA No.5 of 2026 in OS No.700 of 2023 dated
21.08.2026 on the file of the XX Additonal Sessions Court at Allikulam,
Chennai and allow the above Civil Revision Petition.
CRP No. 5695 of 2026
Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to
set aside the order made in IA No.4 of 2026 in OS No.700 of 2023 dated
21.08.2026 on the file of the XX Additional Sessions Court at Allikulam,
Chennai and allow the above Civil Revision Petition.
For Petitioner(s): Mrs.Rita Chandrasekar
for Mrs.R.Meenakshi in all CRPs
For Respondent(s): Mr.A.P.Loganathan in all CRPs
COMMON ORDER
CRP.No.1487 of 2026 has been filed seeking to set aside the order in
E.P.No.1770 of 2025 in O.S.No.700 of 2023 dated 24.02.2026 on the file of the
X Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai.
2.CRP 5691 of 2026 has been filed, challenging the order in IA.No.6 of
2026 in OS.No.700 of 2023 on the file of the XX Additional Sessions Court,
Allikulam, Chennai.
2
__________
Page2 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/10/2026 04:00:13 pm )
CRP No. 5691 of 2026
3.CRP.No.5693 of 2026 has been filed, challenging order in IA.No.5 of
2026 in O.S.No.700 of 2023 dated 21.08.2026 on the file of the XX Additional
Sessions Court, Allikulam, Chennai.
4.CRP.No.5695 of 2026 has been filed, challenging the order in I.A.No.4
of 2026 in O.S.No.700 of 2023 dated 21.08.2026 on the file of the XX
Additional Sessions Court, Allikulam, Chennai.
5.I have heard Mrs.Rita Chandrasekar for Mrs.Meenakshi, learned
counsel for the revision petitioners in all the revision petitions and
Mr.A.P.Loganathan, learned counsel for the respondent in all the revision
petitions.
6.For the sake of convenience, the petitioners are referred to as the legal
heirs of the deceased defendant and the respondent is referred to as the plaintiff.
7.The plaintiff filed O.S.No.700 of 2023, for specific performance of an
agreement of sale, allegedly entered into by the deceased defendant with the
plaintiff on 27.09.2023. The suit was decreed ex-parte on 27.09.2023 and an
execution petition was filed in E.P.No.330 of 2024 for execution of the sale
deed. The same was allowed on 25.08.2025 and admittedly, the sale deed has
3
__________
Page3 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/10/2026 04:00:13 pm )
CRP No. 5691 of 2026
been executed and registered in favour of the plaintiff. The plaintiff thereafter
filed a second execution petition in EP.No. 1770 of 2025, for recovery of
possession from the deceased defendant. It is at that stage that the legal
representatives of the deceased defendant filed various interlocutory
applications, one before the Executing Court and three before the Trial Court.
All the applications filed by the legal representatives, as proposed defendants,
were dismissed, as against which, the present revision petitions have been filed.
8.Mrs.Rita Chandrasekar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners
would firstly contend that the defendant, though had suffered an ex-parte
decree, admittedly died pending the execution petition on 07.12.2024. Inviting
my attention to the typed set of papers, Mrs.Rita Chandrasekar would contend
that the death of the sole defendant was duly intimated to the
respondent/plaintiff, who is in fact a friend of the deceased defendant. She
would however point out to the fact that the chat history was conveniently
cleared by the respondent/plaintiff to erase all evidence with regard to the
factum of the death of the defendant being brought to the notice of the
respondent/plaintiff.
9.The learned counsel for the petitioners would further state that in any
event, the present execution petition is still being proceeded against the
deceased defendant and when interlocutory applications in I.A.Nos. 4, 5 & 6 of
4
__________
Page4 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/10/2026 04:00:13 pm )
CRP No. 5691 of 2026
2026 were duly filed for condonation of delay and to implead the petitioners as
legal representatives of the sole defendant, the Trial Court has erroneously
dismissed all the applications. The learned counsel for the revision petitioners
would further state that the petitioners were not even parties and therefore, the
question of attributing deliberate delay on their part, can never arise. She would
further state that it is the respondent, who has suppressed the factum of the
death of the sole defendant and mischievously proceeded to pursue the
execution petition and attempted to dispossess the petitioners, who are
admittedly in possession. The learned counsel for the petitioners would
therefore pray for the revision petitions being allowed and a fair opportunity
being granted to the petitioners to contest the suit on merits.
10.Per contra, Mr.A.P.Loganathan, learned counsel for the
respondent/plaintiff would state that the petitioners are very much residing in
the suit property and they were fully aware of the proceedings initiated against
the deceased defendant and therefore, it cannot be contended by them that since
they were not parties, the proceedings cannot be initiated against them. Inviting
my attention to the findings of the Trial Court, Mr.A.P.Loganathan, learned
counsel would state that the Court has rightly found that the order to condone
the delay is discretionary and the Court has rightly found that the conduct of the
petitioners clearly exposed deliberate inaction and lack of diligence on their part
in pursuing the matter and the orders therefore do not require any interference.
5
__________
Page5 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/10/2026 04:00:13 pm )
CRP No. 5691 of 2026
11.Mr.A.P.Loganathan, learned counsel for the respondent would further
state that the respondent had already obtained the sale deed from the Court and
on the verge of getting vacant possession in the execution petition and the
decree in favour of the respondent should not be defeated by such vexatious
attempts made by the legal representatives of the defendant.
12.I have carefully considered the submissions advanced by the learned
counsel for the parties.
13.The case of the revision petitioners in all the affidavits, three before
the Trial Court and one before the Executing Court, were that the death of the
sole defendant was duly informed to the respondent/plaintiff, who was in fact a
very close friend of the defendant himself and gaining undue advantage, the
respondent/plaintiff has not brought the death of the defendant to the notice of
the Court and has proceeded with the execution petitions against a dead person
and even the order of delivery has been obtained only against the defendant,
without even impleading the legal representatives.
14.No doubt, the decree has been passed ex-parte and on the date of
decree, the defendant was very much alive. However, subsequently, when the
execution petition came to be filed, he was not alive. It is contended by the
6
__________
Page6 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/10/2026 04:00:13 pm )
CRP No. 5691 of 2026
learned counsel for the petitioners that the respondent/plaintiff was put on
notice about the death of the sole defendant, though Mr.A.P.Loganathan,
learned counsel for the respondent denies the said contentions put forth by
Mrs.Rita Chandrasekar.
15.On going through the counter affidavit filed by the respondent/plaintiff
to the application filed by the revision petitioners, I find that there is no specific
denial of the averment made by the petitioners that copy of the death certificate
was given to the respondent/plaintiff and he was also informed about the death
of the defendant by a whatsapp message. Without specifically denying the
categorical assertion made by the petitioners, the respondent merely states that
the petitioners have not produced documents to support such contentions. In any
event, the fact remains that as on date though a sale deed has been executed by
the Court, on behalf of the defendant, however possession still remains with the
legal representatives of the defendant, who are the revision petitioners and they
have not even been impleaded in the execution petition and by dismissing their
applications to condone delay and to implead themselves in the suit as legal
representatives of the defendant, the Court has virtually given a seal of approval
for the plaintiff/decree holder to proceed with the execution petition as against a
dead person.
7
__________
Page7 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/10/2026 04:00:13 pm )
CRP No. 5691 of 2026
16.Even in the execution petition, I find that the revision petitioners have
not been initially impleaded. However, to an order dated 05.01.2026 in EA.No.2
of 2026, they have been impleaded as judgment debtors 2 to 5. In so far as the
order of delivery, the Executing Court has merely proceeded to order delivery,
on the ground that the ex-parte decree has not been set aside and that the sale
deed has already been executed by the Court on 06.08.2024. The defendant died
only on 07.12.2024 and therefore, when the execution petition for delivery of
possession was initially filed against the defendant, the defendant was not even
alive and in all fairness, the respondent/decree holder ought to have reported the
death of the defendant to the Court and impleaded the legal representatives on
his own accord.
17.It is the specific case of the petitioners that the defendant never
intended to dispose of the property and it was only a financial transaction and
the agreement was executed as security for repayment. It is also contended that
the property is very valuable and the sale consideration reflected in the
agreement of sale is far far below even the then prevailing market value as well.
Unfortunately, the Trial Court has cast the burden upon the legal representatives
of the deceased, judgment debtor for informing the Court about the death of the
judgment debtor. It is the specific case of the petitioners that they were never
impleaded or put on notice in the execution proceedings. On the contrary, it is
their specific case that the mother of the deceased had specifically put the
8
__________
Page8 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/10/2026 04:00:13 pm )
CRP No. 5691 of 2026
respondent/plaintiff on notice about the death of the defendant. Prima facie,
documents are also made available in the typed of the papers to evidence the
said fact and also the factum of chat history being cleared by the
respondent/plaintiff. Excepting for a general denial, there is no specific denial
of such categorical assertions made by the petitioners in this regard. In the light
of the above, I am inclined to interfere with the orders passed by the Trial
Court.
18.In fine, the Civil Revision Petitions are allowed, in the following
manner:
(i) The ex-parte decree in O.S.No.700 of 2023 dated 27.09.2023 on the
file of the XX Additional Sessions Court, Allikulam, Chennai, is set aside and
the applications in I.A.Nos.No.6, 5 & 4 of 2026 in O.S.No.700 of 2023 dated
21.08.2026 on the file of the XX Additional Sessions Court, Allikulam,
Chennai, are allowed.
(ii) The petitioners shall be impleaded as defendants 2 to 5 in the suit and
they shall be called upon to file a written statement, within a period of four
weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order;
(iii) The Trial Court shall frame issues within a period of two weeks
thereafter and shall endeavour to dispose of the suit, within a period of six
months from the date of framing of issues;
(iv) In view of the fact that the sale deed has already been executed, I do
9
__________
Page9 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/10/2026 04:00:13 pm )
CRP No. 5691 of 2026
not intend to disturb the sale at this juncture;
(v) The result of the suit for specific performance shall in any way have a
bearing on the sale deed already executed by the Court and in the event of the
respondent succeeding in the suit for specific performance, then it is needless to
state that the sale deed already executed by the Court will stand validated and
the revision petitioners shall be obligated to vacate and hand over vacant
possession as may be directed by the Trial Court. However, in the event of the
suit for specific performance being dismissed after trial, then the Trial Court
shall issue suitable directions for cancellation of the sale deed already executed
by the Court pursuant to the ex-parte decree passed in the suit for specific
performance.
(vi) There shall be no order as to costs. Connected Civil Miscellaneous
Petition is closed.
16-10-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
ATA
10
__________
Page10 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/10/2026 04:00:13 pm )
CRP No. 5691 of 2026
P.B.BALAJI J.
ATA
To
The XX Additional Sessions Court, Allikulam, Chennai.
CRP Nos.1487, 5691, 5693 & 5695 of 2026
16-10-2026
11
__________
Page11 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/10/2026 04:00:13 pm )