Allowed

Muthoot Leasing and Finance Ltd. v. Amina Bai

Kerala HC17 Nov 2016OP(C)/2747/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought direction under Article 227 to expedite disposal of execution petition EP. No. 207/2014. After examining the lower court's report showing attachment of property and issuance of notices, the Court directed the Additional District Judge to dispose of the matter by 28 February 2017.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Additional District Judge, Kollam to expedite disposal of Execution Petition No. 207/2014 by 28th February 2017.

Muthoot Leasing and Finance Ltd. Vs Amina Bai — 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 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/26TH KARTHIKA, 1938

¶5

OP(C).No. 2747 of 2016 (O) --------------------------EP 207/2014 of ADDL.DISTRICT COURT - VI, KOLLAM DISTRICT

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

MUTHOOT LEASING AND FINANCE LTD, MUTHOOT CHAMBERS, 2ND FLOOR, KURIAN TOWERS, BANERJI ROAD, ERNAKULAM, NOW KNOWN AS MUTHOOT VEHICLE AND ASSET FINANCE LIMITED, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT MUTHOOT CHAMBERS, 2ND FLOOR, OPP SARITHA THEATRE COMPLEX, BANERJEE ROAD, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER AND POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MADHU E, S/O LATE KELAPPAN, AGED 40 YEARS, EDAVATH HOUSE, KARAYAD POST, MEPPAYUR VIA, CALICUT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.SABU S.KALLARAMOOLA

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. AMINA BAI, D/O. SHAMSUDEEN, AGED 35 YEARS, AMINA MAHAL,NATIONAL NAGAR 221, VAYALIL THOPE, PATTATHANAM P.O, VADAKKEVILA VILLAGE, KOLLAM 691 021.

¶11

2. SUNEER.S,

¶12

S/O. SAIDU ABOOBEKKER, AGED 40 YEARS, NISMO, VADAKKEVILA VILLAGE, KOLLAM 691 010.

¶13

3. SHAMSUDEEN M.H,

¶14

S/O. MUHAMMED HASSANAR, AGED 63 YEARS, VAYALILTHOPE, NATIONAL NAGAR 221, VADAKKEVILA VILLAGE, PATTATHANAM P.O, KOLLAM 691 021.

¶15

OP(C).No. 2747 of 2016 (O)

¶16

4. MEHARUNNISSA, W/O SAID ABOOBEKKER, AGED 55 YEARS, NISMO, VADAKKEVILA VILLAGE, KOLLAM - 691 010.

¶17

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17-11-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

¶19

OP(C).No. 2747 of 2016 (O)

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶22

EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION NO 207/2014 PENDING BEFORE THE 6TH ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, KOLLAM. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE bp

¶23

K. RAMAKRISHNAN, J.

¶24

....................................... O.P.(C).No.2747 of 2016

¶25

Dated this the 17^th day of November, 2016.

¶26

JUDGMENT

¶27

This is a petition filed by the petitioner seeking intervention of this court for speedy disposal of the execution petition pending before the V^th Additional District Court, Kollam under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

¶28

It is alleged in the petition that the petitioner is the decree holder who filed E.P.No.207/2014 before the District Court, Kollam for enforcement of the award obtained against the respondents which was later made over to the V^th Additional District Court for disposal. Though the execution petition was filed in the year 2014, the same has not been disposed of so far. So the petitioner has no other remedy except to approach this court seeking the following relief:

¶29

Issue a direction directing the Vth Additional District Court, Kollam to hear and dispose of Ext.P1 execution petition No.207/2014, immediately.

¶30

Considering the nature of relief claimed, this court felt

¶31

that the petition can be disposed of after getting a report from the concerned court regarding the present stage of the case and time required for disposal of the same. Accordingly a report has

¶32

been called for and the Vth Additional District Judge has sent a report which reads as follows:

¶33

O.P.(C).No.2747 of 2016 2

¶34

“EP.207/14 is pending before this court for realization of Rs.5,38,658/- with costs. Earlier E.P.189/09 filed before the 1^st Additional District Court, Kollam was dismissed on 29.7.2011. Thereafter this E.P. Filed on 9.4.2014. In this E.P though R-22 notices were served on JDs 1 to 4, they did not turn up. Immovable property having an extent of 1.51 ares with a building belong to 2^nd JD is already attached and attachment was effected on 2.7.2016. Then the case was posted for further steps to 5.11.16. On that day the decree holder reported that further steps being taken. Then the E.P is posted to 16.11.16 for verification of steps. Now the decree holder has taken steps for issuance of RR-66 notice to JDs 1 to 4. 1^st and 4^th JDs are ladies. 3^rd JD is the father of 1^st JD. 4^th JD is the mother of 2^nd JD. Relationship between 1^st and 2^nd JD is not known.

¶35

Since the decree holder has taken further steps against the immovable property belong to the 2^nd JD, having only extent of 1.51 ares with a building I humbly request time up to 28^th February, 2017 for disposal of the EP”.

¶36

Heard learned for the petitioner Sri. Sabu (Kallarmoola) and perused the report.

¶37

On perusal of the report, it is seen that it cannot be said that no effective steps were taken by the court below for disposal of the case. The property of the second judgment debtor was attached and it was posted for producing sale proclamation under Order 21 Rule 66 of the Code of Civil Procedure and issued

¶38

O.P.(C).No.2747 of 2016 3

¶39

notice to the judgment debtors. So it is also mentioned that the case can be disposed of on or before 28^th February, 2017. So this petition is disposed of as follows:

¶40

The Additional District Judge, Kollam is directed to expedite the disposal of EP.No.207/2014 pending before that court as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, on or before 28^th February, 2017 as undertaken in the report.

¶41

Registry is directed to communicate a copy of this judgment to the court below at the earliest.

¶42

Sd/-

¶43

K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDGE.

¶44

Muthoot Leasing and Finance Ltd. v. Amina Bai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muthoot Leasing and Finance Ltd. v. Amina Bai

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

G.Ponnappan Pillai Vs Padmavathy Amma

Subash Vs Sakunthala

C.V. Gopinathan Vs Sree Durga Bhagavathikkavu

Radhakrishnan Vs Saji Johnson

Sadiya S.Unnithan Vs Santhosh Kumar N.V.

Bena @ Scolastica Vs Jijo Augusthy