Allowed

Ayisha Kutty v. Suresh Babu

Kerala HC10 Oct 2012OP(C)/509/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment in an execution petition directs the lower court to sell only the necessary property extent, incorporate both party valuations in the proclamation, and sell the land in separate lots. The court also grants the petitioner an instalment plan to discharge the decree debt without execution.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was permitted to repay the balance decree debt in 10 equal monthly instalments. If conditions are not met, the court below is directed to sell the property in more than one lot and inco

Ayisha Kutty Vs Suresh Babu — Execution and Attachment | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2012/18TH ASWINA 1934

¶5

OP(C).No. 509 of 2012 (O)

¶6

OS.238/2010 of SUB COURT, OTTAPPALAM

¶7

PETITIONER(S):

¶8

AYISHA KUTTY, AGED 60 YEARS D/O.MARAKKARA MUSALIYAR,PUTHUVEETTIL HOUSE VIYYAKURUSSI,MANNARAKKAD TALUK,PALAKKAD.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

SURESH BABU

¶12

S/O.VIJAYAN,KANJIRATHINKAL HOUSE,KARALMANNA.P.O OTTAPALAM TALUK,PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679101.

¶13

SHORNUR GENERAL FINANCE, SHORNUR REPRESENTED BY MANAGING PARTNER GEETHA ABRAHAM,AGED 58 YEARS

¶14

W/O.CHEMMERIKKATTIL.C.A.ABRAHAM,MAYURAM OTTAPALAM TALUK,SHORNUR-679101.

¶15

R1 BY ADV. SRI.CIBI THOMAS R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.JAYARAM

¶16

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-10-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

APPENDIX IN O.P.(C) NO.509 OF 2012

¶18

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS

¶19

EXT-P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JOINT PETITION FILED BY THE PETITINER AND THE IST RESPONDENT ON THE OTHERS SIDE. EXT-P2 COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION.

¶20

EXT-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE OF THE SUB COURT,OTTAPALAM. EXT-P4 COPY OF THE PLAINT EXT-P5 COPY OF THE RATION CARD

¶21

EXT-P6 COPY OF THE PETITION.

¶22

//TRUE COPY//

¶23

P.S. TO JUDGE.

¶24

V.CHITAMBARESH, J.

¶25

O.P.(C) No. 509 of 2012

¶26

Dated this the 10^th day of October, 2012

¶27

J U D G M E N T

¶28

The petitioner/judgment debtor No.2 impugns Ext.P3

¶29

sale proclamation on the following grounds:-

¶30

(i) Only such of the property as is necessary to satisfy the decree debt need be sold under Order XXI Rule 64 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

¶31

(ii) The estimate of both the decree holder and the judgment debtor should be incorporated in the sale proclamation as per Order XXI Rule 66 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

¶32

The petitioner has already paid Rs.1 lakh towards the total decree debt of Rs.6 lakhs with interest as per the interim order passed in this original petition. I permit the petitioner to repay the balance decree debt in 10 equal monthly instalments starting from 1.11.2012. The property of the petitioner shall not be sold if he complies with the conditions in time. The second respondent/decree holder is at liberty to surge ahead with the execution proceedings in case the petitioner omits

¶33

O.P.(C) No.509 of 2012

¶34

¶35

to comply with the conditions in time.

¶36

The court below shall incorporate the estimate

¶37

given by the petitioner as well as by the second respondent in the sale proclamation. The petitioner contends that the value of the property is Rs.17 lakhs on a modest estimate. The second respondent on the other hand maintains that the property is only worth Rs.5 lakhs. Both the estimates shall be incorporated in the sale proclamation in the event of the sale being conducted on failure to comply with the conditions.

¶38

I also direct the court below to sell the total extent of 17 cents of land in more than one lot. All the lots shall be proclaimed for sale on the same date and venue. Lot No. 2 onwards need be sold only if lot No.1 is not sufficient to satisfy the decree debt. The necessity of sale arises only if the petitioner fails to pay the instalments as offered above.

¶39

The original petition is disposed of as above.

¶40

V.CHITAMBARESH, Judge.

¶41

nj.

Ayisha Kutty v. Suresh Babu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ayisha Kutty v. Suresh Babu

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

M.K. Rajesh Vs Lohithakshan

Chellama Vs Bhanumathi and 7 Others

M.a.Majeeth Vs a.K.Jayadev Singh

Hameed Rawther Vs Achudan Saradha

M/S.C.World Holidays India Private Limited Vs Mrs.Beena Zacharia

M.A.K. Azad Vs Varkey