Disposed

R.Padmanabhan Nair v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Dec 2008WP(C)/28548/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala directed the execution court to disburse Rs.1,39,870/- to certain claimants pending entitlement verification, deducting it from deposited funds before issuing a cheque for the balance amount to other claimants, and disposed of the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Directed the lower court to disburse Rs.1,39,870/- to claimants 14-17 pending entitlement proof; issue cheque for balance amount to other claimants; disposed of writ petition.

R.Padmanabhan Nair Vs State of Kerala — Execution and Attachment | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2008 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1930

¶5

WP(C).No. 28548 of 2008(W)

¶6

-------------------------LAR.5/1981 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM

¶7

PETITIONERS:

¶8

¶9

R.PADMANABHAN NAIR, ULLUKODE VEEDU, THIRUVALLAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.L.MOHANAN

SMT.LIGEY ANTONY

RESPONDENTS:

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,

¶15

MUHAMMED KANNU MOHAMMED IBRAHIM, THOPPUVILAKATHU PUTHEN BUNGLAW, MUTTATHARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,

¶16

MUHAMMED KANNUR MUHAMMED KASIM, DO...DO.....

¶17

MUHAMMED KANNU ABDUL RAHIM, DO....DO....

¶18

MUHAMMED FATHUMAL RAFIYATHU BEEVI, DO....DO....

¶19

M.ABDUL NASHEED, THOPUVILAKATHU VEEDU, MUTTATHARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶20

R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. R.BINDU ADV. SRI.KKM.SHERIF FOR R2-6 SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN FOR R2-6 SRI.LAL K.JOSEPH FOR R2-6 SMT.SHEENA SAMUEL FOR R2-6

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

APPENDIX

¶23

PETITIONER'S EXTS:

¶24

EXT.P1: A TRUE COPY OF THE DECREE IN LAR 5/1981 OF THE SUB COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶25

EXT.P2: -DO- OF E.P. FILED BY THE PETITIONER DT. 15.7.2007

¶26

EXT.P3: -DO- OF THE DECREE IN LAR NO: 5/81 STATEMENT ON 3/7/2008

¶27

EXT.P4: -DO- OF THE REVIEW APPLICATION ON 20/9/2008 IN E.A. 612/2008 FILED BY THE PETITIONER

¶28

RESPONDENTS' EXTS:

¶29

EXT. R2A: TRUE COPY OF THE ABSTRACT OF THE CALCULATION STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT

¶30

jj /TRUE COPY/

¶31

P.A. TO JUDGE

¶32

K.P. BALACHANDRAN, J.

¶33

W.P(C) No. 28548 OF 2008

¶34

Dated this the 1^st December, 2008.

¶35

JUDGMENT

¶36

Heard counsel on both sides.

¶37

Cheque application by claimants 14 to 17 is only for an

¶38

amount of Rs.1,39,870/-. Counsel for the respondents who are claimants 10 to 13 and 52 submits that on account of objection raised by claimants 14 to 17 advancing claim to receive an amount of Rs.1,39,870/- from out of the deposited amount of Rs.41,60,955/- the cheque ordered by the court below for Rs.41,60,955/- in favour of claimants 10 to 13 and 52 is now held up. Respondents' counsel submits that respondents 10 to 13 will file fresh cheque application for amount deducting Rs.1,39,870/from Rs.41,60,955/- so that claimants 14 to 17 will have no grievance for the present and they have no objection to the said amount being disbursed to them provided they are entitled to so much amount by way of enhanced compensation and that, it shall not however, shall not prejudice claimants 10 to 13 and 52 from moving for realisation of the balance amount due to them.

¶39

WPC 28548/08

¶40

¶41

In the result, in modification of the order passed by the court below, I direct the court below to disburse Rs.1,39,870/- on the application of claimants 14 to 17 after deciding the question as to whether so much amount is due to them and in the meanwhile deducting that amount from out of Rs.41,60,955/- deposited by the judgment debtor-State, cheque for the balance amount be issued to claimants 10 to 13 and 52 on the application of their counsel provided they are entitled to so much amount. If any further amount is due to any of the parties they shall be entitled to move for realisation of the balance amount as well in the execution proceedings. In view of the arrangement so made on consent by the counsel for the respondents-claimants 10 to 13 and 52, this writ petition does not require to be retained on file and is hence disposed of.

¶42

K.P.BALACHANDRAN JUDGE

¶43

R.Padmanabhan Nair v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Padmanabhan Nair v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.A.B.S. Adoration Convent & Others Vs Agnusamma & Another

Baduva Alias Baduvankunhi Beary Vs Khadeeja and Another

A.M.Ibrahim Vs M.Hameed and Others

P.C.Sukumara Pillai Vs the Secretary, T.D.B.

Viji Roy Vs Narendranath

P.a.Shabeer Vs Karakkunnil Madhavi