Dismissed

Sathy v. Hillvalley Corporation

Kerala HC14 Jun 2018CRP/347/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In CRP No. 347 of 2017, the High Court of Kerala dismissed a revision petition challenging an order denying recording of decree satisfaction. The Court held that mere dismissal of a prior execution petition does not satisfy the decree, affirming the lower court's dismissal due to lack of merits under Section 115 CPC.

What did the court decide?

The revision petition was dismissed, upholding the lower court's order denying recording of satisfaction of the decree.

Sathy Vs Hillvalley Corporation — Execution and Attachment | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2018 / 24TH JYAISHTA, 1940

¶5

CRP.No. 347 of 2017

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 8.3.2017 IN E.A.NO.2076 OF 2016 IN E.P.NO.187 OF 2013 IN O.S.NO.3069 OF 1999 PASSED BY THE III ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF OF THRISSUR.

¶7

REVISION PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS IN EA/RESPONDENTS 4 TO 7 IN E.P./ LEGAL HEIRS OF JUDGMENT DEBTOR IN O.S.

¶8

1 SATHY, AGED 56, W/O.MARATH VEETTIL AJAYAN(LATE) PERINGOTTUKARA DESOM,THANNYAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK AND DISTRICT,PIN-680 565.

¶9

2 SAJAN, S/O.SATHY AND MARATH VEETTIL AJAYAN(LATE), IN -DO- -DO-

¶10

3 JITHIN, S/O.SATHY AND MARATH VEETTIL AJAYAN(LATE), IN -DO- -DO-

¶11

4 SIJI, D/O.SATHY AND MARATH VEETIL AJAYAN(LATE), IN -DO- -DO-

¶12

BY ADVS.SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN SRI.P.M.NEELAKANDAN SRI.P.B.SUBRAMANIAN SRI.SABU GEORGE SRI.S.NITHIN (ANCHAL)

¶13

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN EA/PETITIONER IN EP/DECREE HOLDER IN O.S.:

¶14

HILLVALLEY CORPORATION, KILLANNUR VILLAGE,THRISSUR DESOM,THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR-680 581, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, VARGHESE JOSE.

¶15

R1 BY ADV. SRI.N.M.MADHU R1 BY ADV. SMT.C.S.RAJANI

¶16

THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14.06.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

P.Somarajan, J.

¶18

C.R.P. No.347 of 2017 A

¶19

Dated this the 14^th day of June, 2018

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

The challenge is against the order dated 8.3.2017 in E.A.No.2076 of 2016 in E.P.No.187 of 2013 in O.S.No3069 of 1999 of the Court of the III Additional Munsiff, Thrissur.

¶22

The abovesaid E.A. was filed by the judgment debtors for recording satisfaction of the decree in view of the dismissal of the earlier Execution Petition and also for the reason that no steps have been taken against the third respondent in the Execution Petition even though an order of attachment of his property was passed in the earlier Execution Petition. It is also submitted that the property sought to be auctioned in the Execution Petition was earlier auctioned in O.S.No.2830 of 1994 and it was purchased by one Jayasanker, S/o.Damodaran from whom the petitioner had purchased the property by discharging the liability. All these contentions were rejected by the lower court.

¶23

C.R.P. No.347 of 2017 A

¶24

:: 2 ::

¶25

Dismissal of the earlier Execution Petition is not a ground to record satisfaction of the decree. It is permissible to submit the Execution Petition within the time of limitation. Further, various remedies are available for the decree holder for realization of the amount covered by the decree. Non issuance of notice against another decree holder (third respondent) is not a ground to record satisfaction of the decree. The petition is really ill-conceived and ill-motivated. The lower court has rightly dismissed the application. Further, no grounds are brought to the notice of this Court in order to have an interference under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Hence the Revision lacks merits, deserves only dismissal. Dismissed.

¶26

Sd/P. Somarajan Judge

¶27

ahz/

Sathy v. Hillvalley Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sathy v. Hillvalley Corporation

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

Dileep Vs State of Kerala

Jasim Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

Abdul Majid Vs State of Kerala

Mavila Prasanna Vs Mullacheri Ramani

N.P.Krishnakumar Vs Surya Nair

Bright Kuries Vs Jos T.J.