MAHAMOODA BEGUM vs ALI MOHAMMED SAIT(DECEASED) 1.FATHIMABAI

CRP No.5024 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05-11-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SOUNTHAR
CRP No. 5024 of 2025
and CMP.No.25363 of 2025
CNR: {HCMA012490232025}
Mahamooda Begum
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
Ali Mohammed Sait (deceased)
1.Fathimabai
2. A.Mohammed Arif
3. A.Mohammed Illyas
4. E.Fasiha
5. R.Farhana
6. A.Mohammed Habeeb
7. A.Mohammed Adam
8. A.Shabir Ahmed
9. Farah Sayeed
10. Mohammed Zai
11. I.Ayisha
Abdul Subban (deceased)
Abdul Majeed (deceased)
12. Mumtaz Bi
13. Musukanbegam
14. Mohamed Muniver (minor)
__________
Page1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 12:33:04 pm )

CRP No.5024 of 2025
(14 and 15 the respondents rep by their mother
Mumtaj Bi., 12th respondent)
15. Shabeed Ahmed (minor)
16. Jakeer Hussain
17. Hajithabe
[12th-17th respondents/13th-20th
respondents/1st-6th and 8,9th judgment debtors]
..Respondent(s)
Prayer : This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of CPC,
praying to allow the Civil Revision Petition thereby setting aside the order dated
17.09.2025 in EA.SR.No.49191/2025 in EP.No.255/2003 on the file of Honble
X Assistant City Civil Court Chennai.
For Petitioner(s): Mr.B.Vijay
for G.Mohammed Aseef

For Respondent(s): Mr.A.Kevin Sagaya Lezarus
for M/s.E.Hariharan
ORDER
This Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the
Executing Court dismissing the application filed by the petitioner under Section
47 of CPC even without numbering.
2. It is not in dispute that the predecessors in interest of respondents 1 to
__________
Page2 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 12:33:04 pm )

CRP No.5024 of 2025
11 namely Ali Mohammed Sait filed a suit for specific performance against the
predecessor in interest of respondents 12 to 17, namely Abdul Subban and
Abdul Majeed, the original plaintiff in the suit. The said suit was dismissed.
Aggrieved by the same, the plaintiffs filed an appeal in A.S.No.149 of 1981 on
the file of VI Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.
3. The First Appeal filed by the plaintiffs was also dismissed. Aggrieved
by the concurrent findings, the plaintiffs filed the second appeal before this
Court in S.A.No.249 of 1983 and the same was allowed by this Court by
judgment and decree dated 20.09.1996.
4. It is the case of the petitioner that she purchased the properties
subsequent to the dismissal of the suit and before filing of the First Appeal. The
th
petitioner was also arrayed as 7 respondent in the second appeal. Since there
was some error in mentioning the rank of the parties who was bound to execute
the sale deed in favour of the plaintiffs as per the decree, the clarification
application was filed and the earlier decree passed in second appeal was
clarified and modified decree was passed on 12.09.1996. As per the decree, the
vendors of the present petitioner has been directed to execute the sale deed in
favour of the plaintiffs. Thereafter, the Execution Petition has been filed by the
plaintiff in EP.No.341 of 1997 and the same was dismissed on some technical
ground. Thereafter, another execution petition was filed in E.P.No.255 of 2003
and the petitioner filed Section 47 application in E.A.No.1060 of 2004. In the
__________
Page3 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 12:33:04 pm )

CRP No.5024 of 2025
said Section 47 application, it was contended by the petitioner that the original
decree passed in second appeal was against dead persons and therefore the same
was not valid. The petitioner also disputed the power of the Court to pass
modified decree. The petitioner also raised a point that one of the minor
respondents in the decree was not properly represented. On all these grounds,
she sought for a declaration that decree was nullity and not executable. The said
Section 47 application filed by the petitioner was dismissed by order dated
03.03.2005. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred revision before this
court in CRP(NPD).No.1174 of 2005. While the Civil Revision Petition was
pending, the main Execution Petition filed by decree holders in E.P.No.255 of
2003 got dismissed on technical grounds. Subsequently, the dismissal of the
main Execution Petition was reported before this Court in Civil Revision
Petition when the same came up for hearing. Recording the same, this court
dismissed CRP(NPD).No.1174 of 2005 as infructuous by order dated
17.07.2017.
5. It is seen that subsequent to the dismissal of the civil revision petition,
the main E.P.No.255 of 2003, which was dismissed on technical ground was
again restored to file. After restoration of main execution petition, the
petitioner herein filed instant application under Section 47 of CPC in
E.A.S.R.No.49191 of 2025, seeking to dismiss the execution petition on the
ground that the decree was not executable. The said application was dismissed
by Executing Court on the ground that second application under Section 47 of
__________
Page4 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 12:33:04 pm )

CRP No.5024 of 2025
CPC on same grounds was not maintainable. Aggrieved by the same, the
petitioner has come before this court.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the
rejection of Section 47 application filed by the petitioner without numbering the
same is not sustainable in law. According to learned counsel, the Executing
Court ought have numbered the execution petition and afforded full opportunity
to the petitioner to putforth his case.
7. It is also submitted that the earlier Section 47 application filed by the
petitioner was dismissed by the Executing Court and the revision filed by the
petitioner against that order was dismissed as infructuous, in view of the
dismissal of the main execution petition. In such circumstances, according to
the counsel, the second application filed by the petitioner under Section 47 of
CPC is maintainable.
8. The submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is not
acceptable to this court. The petitioner already filed Section 47 application
raising her objection to the decree and the same was considered on merits and
dismissed. Challenging the same, she filed a revision before this Court as
stated earlier and the said revision was dismissed as infructuous due to the
dismissal of the main Execution Petition itself. Subsequent to the dismissal of
the revision, the main execution petition was restored to the file. In that case, it
__________
Page5 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 12:33:04 pm )

CRP No.5024 of 2025
is for the petitioner to file appropriate application seeking to recall the order
passed by this Court in the above revision and to consider the same on merits.
Instead of following said procedure, the petitioner ingeniously filed another
application under Section 47 of CPC, raising the very same grounds. When the
earlier application under Section 47 of CPC filed by the petitioner was
dismissed on merits and the revision filed by the petitioner challenging the said
order was also dismissed on technical grounds, the finding of the Executing
Court in the earlier Section 47 application had attained finality. Therefore, the
petitioner is not entitled to maintain a second application under Section 47 of
CPC.
9. In view of the undisputed fact that the petitioner earlier filed Section
47 application and the same was dismissed and the revision against the said
order was also dismissed by this Court, the Executing Court rightly rejected the
second Section 47 application filed by the petitioner even without numbering.
10. I do not find any serious error in the impugned order passed by the
Executing Court. Accordingly, this revision petition stands dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
05-11-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
__________
Page6 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 12:33:04 pm )

CRP No.5024 of 2025
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
ub
To
X Assistant City Civil Court,
Chennai.
S.SOUNTHAR, J.
ub
__________
Page7 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 12:33:04 pm )

CRP No.5024 of 2025
CRP.No.5024 of 2025
05-11-2026
__________
Page8 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2026 12:33:04 pm )