Madras HC Sets Aside Ex-Parte Sale Decree After Possession Was Sought Against Deceased Defendant, Letting Heirs Contest While Court-Executed Sale Deed Remains For Now

The plaintiff obtained an ex parte decree for specific performance against the deceased defendant in O.S. No. 700 of 2023. A sale deed was subsequently executed by the Court, and the plaintiff sought possession in a further execution petition.

The defendant died on 7 December 2024. His legal heirs sought condonation of delay and impleadment in the suit and challenged the execution proceedings. They alleged that the plaintiff had been informed of the death, including by WhatsApp, but had continued proceedings without bringing it to the Court’s attention. The plaintiff disputed their claim. The applications were dismissed, prompting the revisions.

The judgment does not cite a specific statutory provision or precedent governing the applications.

It applies the procedural principle that, where a sole defendant dies and his legal representatives remain in possession of the property, they must be afforded an opportunity to be heard before proceedings affecting their interests are pursued.

The Court also considered the revisional and supervisory jurisdiction invoked under Section 115 CPC and Article 227 of the Constitution, respectively.

The Court found that the plaintiff’s counter-affidavit did not specifically deny the heirs’ categorical assertion that he had received the death certificate and been informed of the death; it merely stated that supporting documents had not been produced.

The heirs remained in possession, had not initially been impleaded in the possession execution proceedings, and the execution had proceeded against the deceased defendant. In those circumstances, dismissing their applications effectively permitted execution against a deceased person without first hearing the persons in possession. The Court therefore found sufficient grounds to interfere, while leaving the already-executed sale deed undisturbed pending trial.

The legal heirs were directed to be impleaded as defendants 2 to 5 and to file their written statement within four weeks; the Trial Court was directed to frame issues thereafter and endeavour to dispose of the suit within six months.

The sale deed was not disturbed at that stage: its effect would depend on the outcome of the suit, with directions for its validation if the plaintiff succeeded or for its cancellation if the suit was dismissed. No costs were awarded.