Disposed

Unnikrishna Pillai v. Sukumara Pillai

Kerala HC10 Feb 2011OP(C)/581/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged an order allowing an execution petition by a legatee. The court held the order was revisible under Section 115 CPC as rejecting the petitioner's objection to the will's validity would have dismissed the petition. The original petition was closed with liberty to file a revision.

What did the court decide?

Original petition closed; liberty granted to file a revision.

Unnikrishna Pillai Vs Sukumara Pillai — Execution and Attachment | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 10TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 21ST MAGHA 1932

¶5

OP(C).No. 581 of 2011(O)

¶6

-----------------------AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 22/12/2010 IN EP 73/2008 IN OS.770/2004 of ADDL.MUNSIFF COURT,CHERTHALA

¶7

PETITIONER/JUDGMENT DEBTOR

¶8

¶9

UNNIKRISHNA PILLAI, S/O.PADMANABHA PILLAI, AGED 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT KAKKAPARAMBU VELIYIL AROOR MURI, AROOR VILLAGE, CHERTHALA, PIN 688534.

¶10

BY ADV. DR.V.N.SANKARJEE

¶11

RESPONDENT(S): DECREE HOLDER

¶12

¶13

SUKUMARA PILLAI, S/O.PADMANABHA PILLAI, ISWARYA HOUSE, AROOR MURI, AROOR VILLAGE, CHERTHALA, PIN 688534.

¶14

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

K.T.SANKARAN, J .

¶16

O.P(C).No.581 OF 2011
------------------------------

¶17

Dated this the 10th day of February, 2011

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

The Original Petition is filed challenging the
order dated 22nd December, 2010 in E.P.No.73 of 2008
in O.S.No.770 of 2004 on the file of the Court of
the Additional Munsiff, Cherthala. The respondent
herein filed the Execution Petition. He claimed
that he is the legal representative of the original
decree holder, namely, Padmanabha Pillai, on the
ground that Padmanabha Pillai had executed a Will
in his favour. The petitioner herein disputed the
genuineness of the Will. The petitioner herein
raised other contentions as well.

¶20

2. The Executing Court found that the Will
executed by Padmanabha Pillai in favour of the
respondent herein is genuine and valid. On that
ground the Execution Petition was found to be
maintainable at the instance of the respondent.

¶21

O.P(C).No.581 OF 2011 2

¶22

3. Had the contention raised by the petitioner
herein been accepted by the Executing Court, the
Execution Petition would have been dismissed. If
so, the test of applicability of Section 115 Code
of Civil Procedure is satisfied. Therefore, the
order impugned is revisable under Section 115 of
the Code of Civil Procedure.

¶23

Since a revision is maintainable, the Original
Petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner
to file a revision.

¶24

K.T.SANKARAN,
 JUDGE.

¶25

cms

Unnikrishna Pillai v. Sukumara Pillai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Unnikrishna Pillai v. Sukumara Pillai

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

C.P.Rajesh Vs State of Kerala

Ratheesh K.R and Others Vs State Bank of Travancore and Others

T.Sreelatha Vs Shibu Sebastian

Joseph Prakash Vs Habeebulla

George Abraham Vs Ranni Marthoma Medical Mission Centre

Mohideen Kutty Haji and 3 Others Vs Hamsa & 2 Others