Allowed

M/S. Marickar Estates & Projects v. Vijayakumar Panicker

Kerala HC6 Oct 2016OP(C)/2367/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged the order for arrest warrant in execution proceedings. During hearing, parties settled; petitioner paid part of decree amount. Court accepted settlement, set aside arrest order, and allowed parties to record satisfaction of decree in execution court to close proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Order of arrest set aside; parties at liberty to move execution court to record satisfaction of decree and close proceedings.

M/S. Marickar Estates & Projects Vs Vijayakumar… — Execution and Attachment | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2016/14TH ASWINA, 1938

¶5

OP(C).No. 2367 of 2015 (O)

¶6

OS.NO.142/2012 OF 1ST ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM.

¶7

ORIGINAL PETITIONER(S):

¶8

1. MARICKAR PLANTATIONS ESTATES & PROJECTS, A UNIT OF MARICKAR PLANTATIONS LTD., 41/3611, OLD RAILWAY STATION ROAD, KOCHI- 682 018, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR F.M.SHAMIER MARICKAR, S/O.DR.Y.M.FAZIL MARICKAR, AGED 38 YEARS, A-6 KENT NALUKETTU, CHAKKAAPARAMBU, VENNALA P.O., KOCHI- 682 028.

¶9

2. F.M.SHAMIER MARICKALR, S/O.DR.Y.M.FAZIL MARICKAR,AGED 38 YEARS, MANAGING DIRECTOR, MARICKAR PLANTATIONS ESTATES AND PROJECTS, A UNIT OF MARICKAR PLANTATIONS LTD., 41/3611, OLD RAILWAY STATION ROAD, KOCHI- 682 018.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.KRISHNA PRASAD. S SRI.NOBEL RAJU

¶11

RESPONDENT(S):

¶12

1. SRI.VIJAYA KUMARA PANICKER, S/O.LATE PADMANABHA PANICKAR EMPLOYED AS SENIOR ELECTRICAL ENGINEER HAVING RESIDENCE AT 'M-36'MATHOOR, CHANGAPUZHA NAGAR, KOCHI- 682 033, REPRESENTED BY IS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, SRI.GOPAKUMAR PANICKAR.

¶13

2. SMT.LEENA VIJAYAKUMAR, W/O.SRI.VIJAYA KUMARA PANICKER, HOUSE WIFE RESIDING AT 'M-36' MATHOOR, CHANGAPUZHA NAGAR, KOCHI- 682 033.

¶14

BY ADVS.SRI.T.R.RAVI

¶15

SRI.JAWAHAR JOSE SRI.V.VINAY MENON

¶16

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06-10-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

mbr/

¶18

OP(C).No. 2367 of 2015 (O)

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶21

EXT P1A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OS 142/2012 DATED 17/11/2012 OF THE COURT OF THE SUB JUDGE, ERNAKULAM.

¶22

EXT P2A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT FILED BY THE COUNSEL BY THE DECREE HOLDER DATED 20/07/2015.

¶23

EXT P3ATTESTED COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUING ARREST WARRANT TO THE JUDGMENT DEBTOR DATED 10/08/2015.

¶24

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

mbr/

K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J.

¶30

O.P. (C) No.2367 of 2015

¶31

Dated this the 6^th day of October, 2016

¶32

JUDGMENT

¶33

This petition is filed by the petitioner challenging Ext.P3 order passed by the court below in E.P.289/2013 in O.S.142/2012 of First Additional Sub Court, Ernakulam under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

¶34

The petitioners are the judgment debtors in E.P.289/2013 in O.S.142/2012 on the file of the First Additional Sub Court, Ernakulam, which was filed by the respondents for realisation of the amount decreed as per Ext.P1 judgment and filed Ext.P2 execution petition. Since the petitioner has not paid the balance amount of Rs.4,67,032/- on 20.7.2015, the court below had by Ext.P3 order ordered arrest and issue warrant to the judgment debtor, this order is being challenged by the petitioner.

¶35

When the application came up for hearing today, the counsel for the petitioner handed over a D.D for Rs.2,92,750/-, which the counsel for the respondents agreed to receive in full satisfaction of the decree, in view of the fact that the entire amount has been paid. The counsel for the respondent submitted that, they will make necessary arrangement to withdraw the execution petition pending before the 3^rd Additional Sub court, Ernakulam. The above submission

¶36

O.P. (C) No.2367 of 2015

¶37

¶38

is recorded and the petition is disposed of as follows:

¶39

The payment of Rs.2,92,750/- by way of Demand Draft handed over to the counsel for the respondents and the submission made by the counsel for the respondent that this amount will satisfy the entire decree and they will make necessary arrangement to withdraw the execution petition before the court below are recorded. The parties are at liberty to move the execution court to record full satisfaction of the decree as satisfied. If such a petition is filed, court below is directed to record full satisfaction and close the execution proceedings. Since the amount has already been paid the order of arrest passed by the court below is set aside. The petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶40

Office is directed the communicate this judgment to the court below at the earliest.

¶41

Sd/- (K. Ramakrishnan, Judge)

¶42

//True Copy//

¶43

P.A. to Judge

¶44

M/S. Marickar Estates & Projects v. Vijayakumar Panicker

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Marickar Estates & Projects v. Vijayakumar Panicker

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

Shine Rama Bhadran Vs Venugopala Pillai

Xavier Kutty Vs Traxpo Enterprises Private Limited

Babu Vs Power Grid Corporation Ltd.

K.C.Abraham Vs Leena George

Muhammed Ashraf Vs Taluk Land Board

Sri.Vijayakumar Panicker Vs M/S.Maricker Estates and Projects