Dismissed

Varghese, v. Jewel Rock Hire Purchase

Kerala HC27 May 2022Ex.FA/7/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an execution first appeal arising from a court order attaching property, the Hon'ble Court dismissed the appeal in limine. The Court observed that the attachment operated only on the judgment debtor's interest, leaving the claimant brother to protect his alleged fractional interest at an appropriate stage.

What did the court decide?

The present appeal is dismissed in limine. The appeal court dismisses the attachment issue and allows the brother to protect his interest elsewhere.

Varghese, Vs Jewel Rock Hire Purchase — Execution and Attachment | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 27^TH DAY OF MAY 2022 / 6TH JYAISHTA, 1944

¶5

EX.FA NO. 7 OF 2022

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 11-10-2021 IN EA 85/2014 IN EP 237/2011 IN OS NO.317 OF 1998 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, THRISSUR.

¶7

APPELLANT/PETITIONER :

¶8

VARGHESE, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O LATE ANTHONY, NO.33/836, CHIRAMMAL VEETIL. KURIACHIRA DESOM, CHIYYARAM VILLAGE. THRISSUR-680 006.

¶9

BY ADVS.

¶10

P.B.KRISHNAN P.B.SUBRAMANYAN SABU GEORGE MANU VYASAN PETER

¶11

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/DECREE HOLDER & JUDGMENT DEBTORS :

¶12

1 JEWEL ROCK HIRE PURCHASE KURIES PRIVATE LIMITED, THRISSUR VILLAGE AND TOWN. THRISSUR-680 001.

¶13

2 JEM JEWELLERS, THRISSUR VILLAGE AND TOWN, THRISSUR-680 001.

¶14

3 JAMES, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O. PORINJU, PALLISSERY VEETIL, RESIDING AT NEHRU NAGAR, PARTNER OF JEM JEWELLERS, THRISSUR VILLAGE AND TOWN, THRISSUR-680 001.

¶15

4 T.P.JOSE, AGED 61 YEARS, S/O THEKKEKARA THAZAHTHADAN PORINJU,AMMADAM DESOM, PARALAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR 680 563. PARTNER OF JEM JEWELLERS, THRISSUR TOWN.

¶16

5 C.A JOHNY, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O CHALISSERY VEETIL ANTHONY, AVINISSERY VILLAGE AND DESOM, THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR-680 306. PARTNER OF JEM JEWELLERS, THRISSUR TOWN.

¶17

THIS EXECUTION FIRST APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

¶18

27.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

Ex.F.A No.7 of 2022 2

¶20

P.SOMARAJAN, J.

¶21

-----------------------------------------------Ex.F.A No.7 of 2022

¶22

---------------------------------------------------Dated this the 27^th day of May, 2022.

¶23

J U D G M E N T

¶24

Against the order of attachment in the execution, the brother of the judgment debtor came up claiming that he has got a fractional interest over the property to the extent of 1/5th

¶25

share. But the attachment was ordered over the entire property. The attachment effected by the trial court would operate only with respect to the interest held by the judgment debtor over the property and as such the claimant, the brother of the judgment debtor, is at liberty to take up the issue at the appropriate stage for protecting his alleged interest over the property. Without prejudice to the said right, the present appeal is hereby dismissed in limine.

¶26

Sd/- P. SOMARAJAN, JUDGE

¶27

amk

Varghese, v. Jewel Rock Hire Purchase

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Varghese, v. Jewel Rock Hire Purchase

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

Jimmy Elias Vs Satyam Audios

P.K.Gopalan (Died) Vs v.K.Kartyhikeyan & Others

Rajeevan@ Rajeevanandan Vs Subrahmanian

State of Kerala Vs Mohammed Issak

Krishnan Namboodiri, Vs Savithri

Matampottayil Aabida Vs Iranikakath Rashit