The court dismissed an original civil petition filed by V.C. RajEEvan challenging an execution order. The court found no illegality in the impugned order or the execution proceedings after hearing counsel.
Impugned order affirmed; interim order vacated; O.P.(C) dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
MONDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1941
OP(C).No. 731 of 2019
(AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 09.11.2018 IN EA.NO.260/2016 IN EP.NO.02/2007 PENDING BEFORE THE COURT OF DISTRICT JUDGE, THALASSERY IN AP.NO.198/2001 ON THE FILE OF ARBITRATOR UDUPI)
PETITIONER/RESPONDENT NO.2:
V.C. RAJEEVAN, AGED 45 YEARS S/O.ACHUTHAN, AGRICULTURIST, SHIJU NIVAS, VENDEKKUMCHAL.P.O.VILAKKODE, IRITTY-670703.
BY ADVS. SRI.P.SAJU SHRI.GANESAN M.
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS NOS.3 TO 7:
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.04.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
OP(C).No. 731 of 2019
2
JUDGMENT
When the matter was taken up, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the amount as ordered by this court could not be deposited. Hence, I am not inclined to issue notice to the respondent. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I find no illegality in the order impugned or in the proceedings in execution. Accordingly O.P.(C) fails and is dismissed. Interim order stands vacated.
Sd/- SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE
R.AV
//True Copy//
PA to Judge
OP(C).No. 731 of 2019
3
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.2716/1991 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN EP 2/2007 DATED 22/01/2019.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN E.A.NO.519/2016 DATED 09/11/2018.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF DRAFT SALE PROCLAMATION DATED 16/02/2016.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION IN E.A.260/2016 DATED 16/01/2016 EP.NO.2/2007.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN E.A.260/2016 DATED 09/11/2018.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS NIL
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned order in execution proceedings warrants interference.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to an order of execution bonafide.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
V.C. RAJEEVAN
1 MAHARASTRA APEX CORPORATION LTD
N.A.ISMAIL
SREEDEVI
SHIJINA
SHYJESH
SUNIL THOMAS
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
