P.v.Cherian v. George Babu
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court set aside an order confirming a sale which was illegally set aside. It held that improper satisfaction of the decree after the 60-day period violated Order 21 Rule 92(2) and confirmed the sale in favor of the auction purchaser.
What did the court decide?
Impugned orders set aside; auction sale confirmed in favor of petitioner; Original Petition allowed.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.ABRAHAM MATHEW
WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/30TH POUSHA, 1937
OP(C).No. 3722 of 2013 (O)
E.A.NOS.245/2013 AND 351/2013 IN E.P.NO.121/2008 IN O.S.NO.175/2003 OF THE SUB COURT, MAVELIKKARA
PETITIONER(S) :
P.V.CHERIAN, S/O.P.C.VARGHESE, PERUMPATTIL PUTHEN VEEDU, CHERUKUNNAM, THEKKEKKARA P.O, MAVELIKKARA, PIN-690 101.
BY ADVS.SRI.MOHAN JACOB GEORGE
SMT.P.V.PARVATHI SMT.REENA THOMAS
RESPONDENT(S) :
----------------------------
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether an application to set aside an auction sale under Order 21 Rule 89 CPC requires deposit of the purchase price in court before filing.
Whether satisfaction of the decree amount between the judgment debtor and decree-holder after the 60-day period can make Rule 92(2) compliant.
Whether Rule 89 and Rule 90 CPC applications can be maintained simultaneously by the judgment debtor.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
P.V.Cherian
- respondent
George Babu
- respondent
Annie Babu
- respondent
Angamaly Chity Fund Pvt. Ltd.
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court