Dismissed

The Narasimha Mills Private v. M/S. Vasavi Cotton Trading

Madras HC5 Apr 2019CRP/3799/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a civil revision petition challenging the attachment of properties of a Private Limited Company. The Court held that without evidence showing the transfer of liability, a decree against a predecessor public company remains valid, and the Execution Court acted correctly within the decree's terms.

What did the court decide?

MARcellous Petition No.1 of 2009 is closed. No costs awarded.

The Narasimha Mills Private Vs M/S. Vasavi Cotton… — Execution and Attachment | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 05.04.2019

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR

¶6

C.R.P. (NPD) No.3799 of 2009
and
M.P.No.1 of 2009
The Narasimha Mills Pvt. Ltd.,
Rep. by its Managing Director,
R.Ravikumar
At Narasimma Naiken Palayam,
Mettupalayam Road,
Coimbatore – 641 031. ... Revision Petitioner
Vs.
1.M/s.Vasavi Cotton Trading Company,
Guntur, Rep. by its Proprietor,
Sri Motamarri Nageshwara Rao
Resident of Nallacheruvu,
Guntur, Guntur District.
2.V.Lakshmi Narashimam
3.Murugathamma ... Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil
Procedure to set aside the order made in E.P.No.34 of 2008 dated 18.09.2008

¶7

on the file of the Principal District Court, Coimbatore and allow this Civil Revision Petition.

¶8

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶9

¶10

For Petitioner : M/s.S.Radha Gopalan

¶11

For Respondents

¶12

R1 : Mr.J.Madana Gopal Rao

¶13

R2 and R3 : No appearance

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

The present revision has been directed as against the order of

¶16

attachment, passed by the Execution Court in E.P.No.34 of 2008.

¶17

2.The only contention of the revision petitioner is that the decree has

¶18

been passed as against a public limited company, but now, the company has changed into a private limited company. Therefore, the decree is not executable. However, to substantiate the same, no evidence has been placed before this Court. Admittedly, the Directors of both the companies are same. This fact is not under dispute.

¶19

3.That being the position, without showing as to what is the nature of the liability, which was transferred to the newly constituted company, the revision petitioner cannot contend that the attachment ordered by the Execution Court is not valid. Without any materials in this regard, this Court cannot go into and proceed with mere oral submissions. Admittedly, decree

¶20

has been passed and has been put into execution and attachment has been http://www.judis.nic.in

¶21

¶22

ordered by the Execution Court for realisation of the amount by rightly holding that the Execution Court cannot go beyond the decree. It appears that the decree has also not been challenged for all these days.

¶23

4.Therefore, I find no illegality or perversity in the order of attachment

¶24

passed by the Execution Court in E.P.No.34 of 2008. In the result, this Civil

¶25

Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶26

05.04.2019 mkn Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Speaking order / Nonspeaking order To

¶27

The Principal District Judge, Coimbatore.

¶28

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶29

¶30

N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.

¶31

mkn

¶32

C.R.P. (NPD) No.3799 of 2009
and M.P.No.1 of 2009

¶33

05.04.2019

¶34

http://www.judis.nic.in

The Narasimha Mills Private v. M/S. Vasavi Cotton Trading

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Narasimha Mills Private v. M/S. Vasavi Cotton Trading

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

S.Jayabalan Vs K.S.Muthu Sami Gounder

Venkatesan Vs Narayanan

Kg Ravichandran Vs v. Annamalai

R.Balasubramaniam Vs S.Ramasamy

N.M.Arun Vs S.Y.Heerajan (Died)

S.Kannan Vs I.Sivalingam (Died)