Ibrahim v. Shylaja
Case brief
What is this about?
This writ petition challenged an order setting aside attachment before judgment of Provident Fund and gratuity amounts. The court disposed of the petition based on the petitioner's concession that amounts had been appropriated, deeming merits examination unnecessary.
What did the court decide?
N/A; petition disposed without examination of merits due to conceded facts.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
FRIDAY, THE 30TH JANUARY 2009 / 10TH MAGHA 1930
WP(C).No. 2443 of 2006(N)
------------------------CMA.46/2004 of ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, PARAVUR OS.689/2003 of MUNSIFF COURT, PARAVUR (IA.NO.2416/2003) ....................
PETITIONER(S):
IBRAHIM, S/O.KUTTY, MANYATTU PARAMBIL, RESIDING AT PATTERI PARAMBIL, VADAKKUMBHAGAM KARA, EZHIKKARA, EZHIKKARA VILLAGE, PARAVUR TALUK.
BY ADV. SRI.A.X.VARGHESE
RESPONDENT(S):
- SHYLAJA, W/O.VASUDEVAN PILLAI, RESIDING AT MURUKALAYAM VEEDU, PULLAR DESOM ROAD, PALLURUTHY KARA, PALLURUTHY VILLAGE.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the District Judge's order setting aside attachment of provident fund and gratuity amounts was sustainable given the petitioner's concession regarding appropriation.
If the attached amounts had reached the employee, whether the writ petition challenging the setting aside of attachment needed merits examination.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
IBRAHIM
- respondent
SHYLAJA
- respondent
ANOOP
- respondent
ARUN
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court