Disposed

Nataraja Gowndar v. Renjith Kumar

Kerala HC5 Jan 2009WP(C)/220/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the Munsiff, Chittur, to not disburse sale proceeds deposited in O.S.436/04 to the decree holder until ratable distribution applications are disposed of, and dismissed the writ petition with this stay.

What did the court decide?

The Munsiff, Chittur is directed not to disburse the sale proceeds of the property sold in O.S.436/04 to the decree holder until Exts.P5, P6 and P7 petitions are disposed of.

Nataraja Gowndar Vs Renjith Kumar — Execution and Attachment | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 5TH JANUARY 2009 / 15TH POUSHA 1930

¶5

WP(C).No.220 of 2009 (A)

¶6

-------------------------------OS.436/2004 of MUNSIFF COURT, CHITTUR ....................

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

---------------

¶9

NADARAJA GOUNDER, S/O. MARAPPA GOUNDER, R.V.P PUDUR, ERUTHEMPATHY VILLAGE, CHITOOR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN SMT.A.R.PRAVITHA

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

-----------------

¶13

1. RENJITH KUMAR, S/O. PONNUMALA, AMBAT PALAYAM, CHITOOR TALUK, CHITTUR P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶14

2. NANDINI, W/O. LATE RAMESH, KALLIYAMPARA, VADAKARAPATHY, CHITOOR TALUK, CHITTUR P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶15

3. SURYA, D/O. LATE REMESH, MINOR, REPRESENTED BY COURT GUARDIAN, ADV. LATHA, CHITTUR.

¶16

4. NARAYANAN, S/O. BHASKARAN, SANTHI NAGAR, PARISIKKAL, CHITUR P.O.

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

K.P.BALACHANDRAN, J.

¶19

W. P. C. No.220 of 2009

¶20

-----------------------------------------------Dated this the 5^th day of January, 2009

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

The grievance of the petitioner who is

¶23

decree holder in O.S Nos.455/04 and 518/06 on

¶24

the file of the Munsiff's Court, Chittur is that in execution of a money decree in O.S.436/04 the property of the judgment debtor who is the judgment debtor in all the three cases aforesaid was brought to sale and was purchased by a stranger auction purchaser one Narayanan son of Bhaskaran and the sale amount is deposited to the credit of O.S.436/04 and that is not disbursed to the decree holder in O.S.436/04 and the petitioner has filed Ext.P7 application for ratable distribution; Ext.P6 application for impleadment in the execution proceedings for claiming ratable distribution

¶25

-2-

¶26

W. P. C. No.220 of 2009

¶27

and Ext.P5 application seeking for an order

¶28

not to disburse the amount to the decree holder in O.S.436/04 before disposal of Ext.P7 petition filed by him for ratable distribution and that before passing any order thereon the

¶29

court below is likely to disburse the amount

¶30

that has come to the credit of the suit and that therefore, all further proceedings for

¶31

disbursement of the amount to the first respondent/decree holder be stayed till

¶32

disposal of Exts.P5, P6 and P7.

¶33

already confirmed and the court is shortly to

¶34

issue sale certificate to the stranger auction purchaser; that the property that is so sold had been attached also by the petitioner in the suits filed by him and that if the sale proceeds are also disbursed to the first

¶35

-3-

¶36

W. P. C. No.220 of 2009

¶37

respondent decree holder, the petitioner will

¶38

be without any remedy.

¶39

propose to pass in this Writ Petition, it is not necessary to issue notice to the first respondent as the Writ Petition itself will

¶40

become infructuous if in the meanwhile, the first respondent/decree holder withdraws the sale proceeds that are in deposit before court.

¶41

In the result, I direct the Munsiff,

¶42

Chittur to dispose of Exts.P5 to P7 according to law as early as possible and that before disposal of those petitions the amount in deposit to the credit of O.S.436/04 by sale of the property belonging to the judgment debtor

¶43

shall not be disbursed to the first

¶44

respondent/decree holder.

¶45

-4-

¶46

W. P. C. No.220 of 2009

¶47

This Writ Petition is disposed of with the above directions. Issue copy of this judgment to the counsel for the petitioner urgently to be produced before the execution court forthwith.

¶48

K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JUDGE

¶49

kns/-

Nataraja Gowndar v. Renjith Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nataraja Gowndar v. Renjith Kumar

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

E.v.James Vs O.v.Johny

Suprabha Vs Salim S.Rajan

Peringottukara Namboothiri Yogakshema Vs K.B.Aliyar

Devadas Vs B.P.Subhash

Mathew and Another Vs Range Officer and Another

S.Rema Vs Bahuleyan Nair