PALANIAMMAL Vs. S. PERIASAMY AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE only question which has been argued and which arises in this revision petition is whether the Execution Petition filed on 11th July, 1983 by the decree -holder is barred by limitation.

(2.) A decree directing the defendant to put the plaintiff in possession of the suit property was passed in O.S.No. 155 of 1963 by the District Munsif's Court, Erode on 27th August, 1964. This decree was confirmed by the appellate Court when A.S.No. 161 of 1965 filed by the defendant was dismissed on 21st December, 1967. S.A.No. 826 of 1969 filed by the defendant was also dismissed on 23rd December, 1971. A petition under Order 21, Rules 22 and 35, C.P.C for execution of the decree was filed on 11th July, 1983.

(3.) MR . Sivamani who appears on behalf of the petitioners in this revision petition has contended that the petition for execution must be held to be barred by limitation since it is filed beyond twelve years from the date of the decree of the trial court. He relied on the opening words of Column 3 of Article 136 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Article 136 of the Limitation Act reads as follows: