Disposed

T.Sasendran Nair v. Patten Chandrasekharan

Kerala HC1 Jul 2011OP(C)/844/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of an execution petition challenging a warrant of arrest. The Court allowed payment of the balance decree amount in monthly instalments, stayed execution proceedings for six months, and directed immediate re-execution upon default.

What did the court decide?

Balance decree amount directed to be paid in six monthly instalments; execution proceedings stayed for six months pending payment.

T.Sasendran Nair Vs Patten Chandrasekharan — 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

FRIDAY, THE 1ST JULY 2011 / 10TH ASHADHA 1933

¶5

OP(C).No. 844 of 2011(O)

¶6

-----------------------OS.136/2009 of ADDL.MUNSIFF COURT, KANNUR

¶7

PETITIONER/RESPONDENT:

¶8

¶9

T.SASEENDRAN NAIR, S/O.KUNHAPPA NAIR, KALLIASSERY AMOSM, DEOSM, KANNUR.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT SRI.K.N.ABHILASH SMT.R.LEELA

¶11

SMT.N.K.SHEEBA

¶12

RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER:

¶13

¶14

PATTEN CHANDRASEKHARAN, S/O.KUNHAMBU, ANCHANA COMPLEX, VELAPURAM, PAPPINISSERI P.O., KANNUR-670 131

¶15

ADV. SRI.N.NAGARESH FOR R1

¶16

SRI.K.BABU FOR R1

¶17

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

OP(C).No. 844 of 2011(O)

¶19

PETITIONER'S EXTS:

¶20

EXT.P1: COPY OF JUDGMENT DTD.13/8/2010 IN OS NO.136/09 OF MUNSIFF COURT, KANNUR

¶21

EXT.P2: COPY OF APPLICATION DTD.NIL IN EP 324/2010 IN OS NO.136/09 OF MUNSIFF COURT KANNUR

¶22

EXT.P3: COPY OF AFFIDAVIT DTD.3.2.2011 IN E.A.NO.79/2011 IN EP 324/2010 IN OS NO.136/2009 OF MUNSIFF COURT, KANNUR

¶23

EXT.P4: COPY OF MEMO WHICH SHOWS THAT THE PETITIONER PAID AN AMOUNT OF RS.10,000/- DTD.11.2.2011 IN EP 324/2010 IN OS 136/2009 OF MUNSIFF COURT, KANNUR.

¶24

EXT.P5: COPY OF ORDER DTD.18.2.2011 IN EA NO.79/2011 IN EP 324/2010 IN OS NO.136/09 OF MUNSIFF COURT, KANNUR.

¶25

RESPONDENT'S EXTS: NIL

¶26

/TRUE COPY/

¶27

P.ATO JUDGE

¶28

K.T.SANKARAN, J .

¶29

O.P(C)No.844 OF 2011

¶30

Dated this the 1st day of July, 2011

¶31

JUDGMENT

¶32

The judgment debtor in EP No.324 of 2010 in O.S.No.136 of 2009 on the file of the Court of the Munsiff of Kannur challenges in this Original Petition the order passed by the court below refusing to recall the warrant for arrest issued against the petitioner.

¶33

The decree is sought to be executed by arrest

¶34

and detention of the petitioner in civil prison. The total amount due is 90,829/-. It is submitted by both sides that a total sum of 35,000/- was paid by the judgment debtor to the decree holder. Only the balance is due.

¶35

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is prepared to pay the decree amount in

¶36

¶37

ten monthly instalments. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent/decree holder submitted that only a reasonable time may be granted to the judgment debtor to pay off the decree debt.

¶38

Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, and the submissions made by the counsel on either side, the Original Petition is disposed of as follows:

¶39

a) The petitioner shall pay the balance decree amount to the respondent in six monthly instalments. The first instalment shall be paid on or before 5^th August, 2011. The rest of the instalments shall be paid on or before the 5^th of the succeeding months. If the 5^th day of a particular month happens to be a holiday, the petitioner will be entitled to pay the particular instalment on the next working day of that month.

¶40

b) If the petitioner commits default in payment of any

¶41

¶42

of the instalments, the entire balance decree amount will become due and the warrant of arrest issued against the petitioner shall be executed.

¶43

c) The proceedings in Execution shall be kept in abeyance for a period of six months to enable the petitioner to pay off the decree debt in the manner indicated above. However, if default is committed by the petitioner, the Executing Court shall proceed with the execution even before the expiry of six months.

¶44

K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE .

¶45

cms

T.Sasendran Nair v. Patten Chandrasekharan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.Sasendran Nair v. Patten Chandrasekharan

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

Baby.a Vs State of Kerala

Shawn Mathew Vs State of Kerala and Another

Babu Yoosaf and Others Vs State of Kerala

Sunil Vs State of Kerala

Krishnan Vs the State of Kerala

Stalin Vs State of Kerala