Dismissed

Lorance, v. Swarag Chits (P) Ltd.

Kerala HC3 Jul 2019OP(C)/542/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this execution petition concerning a decree against the petitioner, the Kerala High Court found no merit in the petition's objections. The Court permitted the petitioner to clear the entire due amount in 10 equal monthly instalments, directing the execution court to close the proceedings upon the first payment, with revival rights reserved for any default.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to discharge entire due amount in 10 equal monthly instalments; execution proceeding closed upon payment of first instalment with right to revive on default.

Lorance, Vs Swarag Chits (P) Ltd. — Execution and Attachment | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF JULY 2019 / 12TH ASHADHA, 1941

¶5

OP(C).No.542 of 2019

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OS 387/2013 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,IRINJALAKUDA

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

LORANCE, AGED 45 YEARS S/O CHENATHPARAMBIL ANTONY, KIZHUTHANI DESOM, KARALAM VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR - 680 701.

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.K.SHAJ SHRI.THAREEQ ANVER SRI.RENJIT GEORGE

¶10

RESPONDENT:

¶11

SWARAG CHITS (P) LTD., IRINJALAKUDA VILLAGE, DESOM, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT MANAGING DIRECTOR OUSEPPUNNI, AGED 74 YEARS, S/O ALUKKAL KUNJUVAREETH, IRINJALAKUDA DESOM, MANAVALASSERY VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR - 680 121. BY ADVS. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN SMT.ASHA K.SHENOY SMT.PREETHI RAMAKRISHNAN (P-212) SRI.C.ANIL KUMAR SRI.PRATAP ABRAHAM VARGHESE SRI.T.C.KRISHNA

¶12

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

OP(C).No.542 of 2019

¶14

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

Petitioner challenges the execution

¶17

proceedings. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent in extenso, I find no merit in the grounds taken up by the petitioner herein. Hence, I am not inclined to interfere in Ext.P6 order in

¶18

E.P.No.124/2016. I feel that considering the entire facts, the petitioner can be permitted to pay the entire amount due in instalments after

¶19

deducting the amounts, if any, paid during the pendency of the proceedings.

¶20

2. Accordingly, O.P.(C) is disposed of with a direction that the petitioner shall discharge the entire amount due in 10 equal monthly instalments commencing from 5^th August 2019. The execution court shall take up the matter on

¶21

05.08.2019 and if the 1^st instalment is paid, shall close the execution petition reserving the

¶22

OP(C).No.542 of 2019

¶23

¶24

right of the decree holder to revive it, in case of default of any of the monthly instalment. In case of such default, the decree holder will be entitled to file a memo with notice to the counsel, who is now appearing for the decree holder before the court below and on filing such memo the execution proceeding will stand revived and can continue from the stage where it was closed.

¶25

O.P.(C) is disposed of as above.

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE

¶28

Pn 04/07

¶29

OP(C).No.542 of 2019

¶30

¶31

APPENDIX

¶32

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶33

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 19/11/2013 IN O.S.NO.387/2013 OF THE SUB COURT, IRINJALAKKUDA.

¶34

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF E.P.NO.124/2016 IN O.S.NO.387/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SUB COURT, IRINJALAKUDA FILED BY THE RESPONDENT.

¶35

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF EA NO.387/2018 IN E.P.NO.124/2016 IN O.S.NO.387/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SUB COURT, IRINJALAKUDA.

¶36

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF OBJECTION DATED 11/09/2018 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT IN E.A.NO.387/2018 IN E.P. NO.124/2016 IN O.S. NO.387/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SUB COURT, IRINJALAKUDA.

¶37

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF ARGUMENT NOTE FILED BY THE COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT IN E.A. NO.387/2018 IN E.P. NO.124/2016 IN O.S.NO.387/2013 BEFORE THE SUB COURT, IRINJALAKUDA.

¶38

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 17/12/2018 IN E.A. NO.387/2018 IN E.P.NO.124/2016 IN O.S.NO.387/2013 OF THE SUB COURT, IRINJALAKUDA.

¶39

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF NOTIFICATION DATED 30/04/2012 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA.

¶40

EXHIBIT P8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE CHALLAN DATED 09.04.2019 ISSUED AGAINST THE DEPOSIT OF RS.65,000/- BY THE PETITIONER IN TREASURY, IRINJALAKUDA

¶41

OP(C).No.542 of 2019

¶42

¶43

EXHIBIT P9 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 23.05.2017 ISSUED BY THE COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P10 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 07.07.2017 ISSUED BY THE COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P11 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 10.07.2017 ISSUED BY THE COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P12 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 03.08.2017 ISSUED BY THE COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P13 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 03.11.2017 ISSUED BY THE COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P14 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 05.02.2018 ISSUED BY THE COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P15 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 26.03.2018 ISSUED BY THE COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT.

Lorance, v. Swarag Chits (P) Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lorance, v. Swarag Chits (P) Ltd.

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

Sabeeba Beegum Vs Muslim Association Education Trust

Naseema Vs C.M.Rahmathulla

Sindhu.S.Akkara Vs Joby Thomas

Sadanandan Vs Saraswathy

Jetty John Vs Rajan Cheriyathu

Kalesh Babu Vs Sree Vidya Prakashini Sabha