Disposed

K.S. Roopeshkumar v. Mani Sarmilakumari

Kerala HC3 Apr 2024OP(C)/843/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Additional defendants in a suit sought stay of a pending execution petition after dismissal of their appeals, intending to file a second appeal. The High Court directed the Munsiff Court, Attingal to keep the execution petition in abeyance until certified copy of the appellate judgment is received plus ten days.

What did the court decide?

Trial court directed to keep E.P.No.2/2019 in abeyance till receipt of certified copy of appellate judgment and ten days thereafter.

K.S. Roopeshkumar Vs Mani Sarmilakumari — Execution and Attachment | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 3^RD DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 14TH CHAITHRA, 1946

¶5

OP(C) NO. 843 OF 2024

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN EP NO.2 OF 2019 OF MUNSIFF COURT,ATTINGAL ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN OS NO.14 OF 2000 OF MUNSIFF COURT,ATTINGAL

¶7

PETITIONERS/JUDGMENT DEBTORS 5 TO 7 IN EP NO.2/2019 IN OS NO.14/2000:

¶8

1 K.S. ROOPESHKUMAR AGED 44 YEARS, S/O. K.S.SASIKUMAR, KOTTAKKAKAM VEEDU, PERUMGUZHY DESOM, AZHOOR VILLAGE, CHIRAYANKEEZH TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT (EARLIER FROM KARAKKATTU VEEDU, MEENACHIL, EDAMATTOM VILLAGE, MEENACHIL TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT), PIN - 695305

¶9

2 K.S. SASIKUMAR AGED 70 YEARS, S/O. SANKARAN, KOTTAKKAKAM VEEDU, PERUMGUZHY DESOM, AZHOOR VILLAGE, CHIRAYANKEEZH TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT (EARLIER FROM KARAKKATTU VEEDU, MEENACHIL, EDAMATTOM VILLAGE, MEENACHIL TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT ), PIN - 695305

¶10

3 THANKAMMA SASIKUMAR AGED 67 YEARS, W/O. SASIKUMAR, KOTTAKKAKAM VEEDU, PERUMGUZHY DESOM, AZHOOR VILLAGE, CHIRAYANKEEZH TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT (EARLIER FROM KARAKKATTU VEEDU, MEENACHIL, EDAMATTOM VILLAGE, MEENACHIL TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT), PIN – 695305

¶11

BY ADVS. M.P.RAMNATH P.RAJESH (KOTTAKKAL) K.J.SEBASTIAN M.VARGHESE VARGHESE UMA R.KAMATH S.SANDHYA BEPIN PAUL SHALU VARGHESE S.DEEPAK

¶12

O.P.(C) No. 843 of 2024

¶13

..2..

¶14

ANTONY THARIAN

¶15

POOJA KRISHNA K.B.

¶16

RESPONDENTS/DECREE HOLDERS & JUDGMENT DEBTORS 2 TO 4 IN EP NO.2/2019 IN OS NO.14/2000:

¶17

1 MANI SARMILAKUMARI AGED 54 YEARS, W/O. SIVANANDAN MANI, THIRUVATHIRA, PERUMGUZHY DESOM, AZHOOR VILLAGE, CHIRAYANKEEZH TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695305

¶18

2 SIVANANDAN MANI

¶19

AGED 73 YEARS,S/O. SIVANANDAN, THIRUVATHIRA, PERUMGUZHY DESOM, AZHOOR VILLAGE, CHIRAYANKEEZH TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695305

¶20

3 RAMACHANDRAN SHYLAJA AGED 60 YEARS, W/O. LATE RAMACHANDRAN, ARAYANTHOPPU VEEDU, PERUMGUZHY DESOM, AZHOOR VILLAGE, CHIRAYANKEEZH TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695305

¶21

4 RAMACHANDRAN RAJESH AGED 38 YEARS, S/O. RAMACHANDRAN, ARAYANTHOPPU VEEDU, PERUMGUZHY DESOM, AZHOOR VILLAGE, CHIRAYANKEEZH TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695305

¶22

5 RASHNA

¶23

AGED 35 YEARS, D/O. RAMACHANDRAN, ARAYANTHOPPU VEEDU, PERUMGUZHY DESOM, AZHOOR VILLAGE, CHIRAYANKEEZH TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695305

¶24

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

O.P.(C) No. 843 of 2024

¶26

..3..

¶27

J U D G M E N T

¶28

The petitioners are the additional defendants in O.S.No.14/2000 on the file of Munsiff Court, Attingal (for short, 'the trial court'). The respondents are the plaintiffs and the remaining defendants.

¶29

There is a connected suit as O.S.No.204/2000. Both suits were tried together and a common judgment was passed. The petitioners herein preferred two appeals as Exts.P2 and P3 before the Sub Court, Attingal. The Sub Court dismissed those appeals on 23/03/2024. The Execution Petition preferred by the plaintiffs/decree holders was already pending before the trial court as E.P.No.2/2019. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that because of the pendency of the appeal, E.P. was kept in abeyance. Now, the grievance of the petitioners is that on the next day of disposing of the appeals, the execution court took up E.P. and ordered delivery. The Execution Petition now stands posted to 06/04/2024 for delivery. The counsel further submits that he has already applied for certified copy of the judgment and the petitioners intend to prefer a second appeal.

¶30

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the trial court is directed to keep in abeyance the Execution Petition till the certified

¶31

O.P.(C) No. 843 of 2024

¶32

..4..

¶33

copy of the judgment in appeal is received and also for a further period of ten

¶34

days thereafter.

¶35

The original petition is disposed of as above.

¶36

Sd/-

¶37

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

¶38

JUDGE

¶39

APA

¶40

O.P.(C) No. 843 of 2024

¶41

..5..

¶42

APPENDIX OF OP(C) 843/2024

¶43

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶44

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE PHOTO COPY 11.03.2010 IN OS HON'BLE MUNSIFF'S	OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DT NO.14/2000 AND 204/2000 OF THE COURT, ATTINGAL
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE PHOTO COPY O AS NO.61/2010 SUB	F THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL IN COURT, ATTINGAL
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE PHOTO COPY O AS NO.62/2010 SUB	F THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL IN COURT, ATTINGAL
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE PHOTO COPY	OF EXECUTION PETITION DT
	10.01.2019 AS EP BEFORE MUNSIFF'S C	NO.2/2019 IN OS NO.14/2000 OURT, ATTINGAL

K.S. Roopeshkumar v. Mani Sarmilakumari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.S. Roopeshkumar v. Mani Sarmilakumari

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

Salim Vs Muhammed M Nasarulla

Jomon Sebastian Vs Sasikala.S

Tenson.C.D, Vs M/S. Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd.

Arun Boby Vs Asharaf

Alex Augustine Vs the Authorised Officer

Shyni Vs Jijo