Disposed

N.K.Radhakrishnan v. Leelamma

Kerala HC24 Jul 2008WP(C)/22310/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala directed the Sub Court, Cherthala to expeditiously dispose of the execution petition and associated execution application within four months of receiving a copy of this judgment to prevent unjustified adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Directed the executing court to dispose of the execution petition including E.A.No.23 of 2008 within four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

N.K.Radhakrishnan Vs Leelamma — Execution and Attachment | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 24TH JULY 2008 / 2ND SRAVANA 1930

¶5

WP(C).No. 22310 of 2008(F) -------------------------OS.189/1995 of SUB COURT, CHERTHALA

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

¶8

N.K.RADHAKRISHNAN, KALLAYIL CHIRAYIL HOUSE, THANNEERMUKKOM P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY SMT.N.SANTHA SRI.PETER JOSE CHRISTO SRI.S.A.ANAND

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

¶12

LEELAMMA, MALAPARAMBIL, VARANAM MURI THANNEERMUKKOM NORTH VILLAGE, CHERTHALA.

¶13

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶16

W.P.(C) No.22310 of 2008

¶17

Dated this the 24^th July, 2008.

¶18

J U D G M E N T

¶19

Petitioner is the decree holder in O.S.No.189 of 1995, on the file of Sub Court, Cherthala. Respondent is the judgment debtor. This petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for a direction to Sub Court, Cherthala, to dispose the execution petition within a time limit.

¶20

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner was

¶21

heard.

¶22

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that decree for recovery of possession was confirmed by the appellate court in A.S.No.16 of 2006 on 9.10.2007, and though respondent had instituted O.S.No.114 of 1985 for partition of the property, that was finally settled by this Court in S.A.No.423 of 1995 on 2.2.2005 rejecting the claim and as seen from Ext.P1, the execution petition is being adjourned for no valid reason, and, therefore, necessary directions are to be issued.

¶23

W.P.(C) No.22310 of 2008

¶24

¶25

It is seen from Ext.P1 that delivery of item Nos.1

¶26

and 2 of the decree schedule property was passed on 9.1.2008. Thereafter, a petition for review was filed. It is being adjourned thereafter for hearing. In such circumstances, executing court is directed to dispose the execution petition including E.A.No.23 of 2008, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶27

The writ petition is disposed as above.

¶28

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE

¶29

nj.

N.K.Radhakrishnan v. Leelamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.K.Radhakrishnan v. Leelamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anopkumar and Another Vs Jeeja Ratnam and Others

A.Sivadasan Vs P.P.Dileep Kumar

V.R.Bhaskaran Vs Ameri Padmanabhan

Narayanan Nair Vs Usha Kumari

K.P.Anil Kumar Vs the Secretary, Kerala Khadi Grama

Kottayam District Co-Op.Bank Vs Saidkutty