9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 2034X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... athy, Adv. Mr. Shilp Vinod, Adv. Mr. Pushkin Raj Kumar, Adv. For Ms. Shobha Ramamoorthy, AOR ORDER This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 22.01.2007, passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Judicature at Madras in C.R.P. (NPD) No. 1829 of 2006. By the impugned judgment, the High Court while dismissing the revision petition has confirmed the orders of the Execut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r 2006 is barred by limitation inasmuch as the same was not filed within 12 years from the date of the judgment of the Trial Court, i.e., dated 14.08.1981. 3. In sum and substance, the case of the appellant is that the execution petition ought to have been filed within 12 years from the date of the judgment of the Trial Court without waiting for the decision of the First Appellate Court or the Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt dismissed the second appeal on 30.12.2003. The execution petition was filed in July 2006. Thus, undisputedly, the execution petition was within the period of limitation from the date of the judgment of the High Court. 5. The aforementioned question raised by the learned advocate for the appellant is no more res-integra, inasmuch as the very question is decided by a Three Judge Bench of this Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tents and purposes, the suit continues. When a higher forum entertains an appeal and passes an order on merit, the doctrine of merger would apply. The doctrine of merger is based on the principles of the propriety in the hierarchy of the justice delivery system. The doctrine of merger does not make a distinction between an order of reversal, modification or an order of confirmation passed by the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
