Disposed

Tripplar School of Learning v. Mannava Bapaiah

Telangana HC10 Apr 2014CRP/3005/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal and Civil Revision Petition concerning an execution proceedings stay. It accepted the appellant's undertaking to pay the balance dues within eight months and directed a stay on lower court proceedings and an injunction against alienation of movable assets pending payment.

What did the court decide?

Stay of lower court execution and related proceedings for eight months; injunction against alienation of movable assets; permission to respondent to withdraw deposited sum.

Tripplar School of Learning Vs Mannava Bapaiah — Execution and Attachment | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY CMA.No.561 OF 2013 AND

¶2

CRP.No.3005 of 2013 Date:10.04.2014

¶3

Between:

¶4

Tripplar School of Learning, Guntur, reptd by its Managing Partner-T.V.Sambasiva Rao

¶5

……Appellant/Petitioner

¶6

And: Mannava Bapaiah, S/o Hanumantha Rao

¶7

… Respondent

¶8

Counsel for the Appellant/petitioner: Sri S.R.Sanku Counsel for the respondent: Sri K.S.Murthy

¶9

The Court made the following:

¶10

COMMON JUDGMENT:

¶11

The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against order, dated 20.06.2013, passed in I.A.No.209 of 2013 in O.S.No.157 of 2013 on the file of the learned IV Additional Senior Civil Judge, Guntur.

¶12

The Civil Revision Petition is filed against order, dated 20.06.2013, passed in I.A.No.208 of 2013 in O.S.No.157 of 2004 passed by the same Court.

¶13

As a matter of fact, both the above-mentioned I.As were disposed of by a common order.

¶14

Sri T.V.Sambasiva Rao, the Managing Partner of the appellant in the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal and the petitioner in the Civil Revision Petition, filed a sworn affidavit in Civil Revision Petition No.3005 of 2013,

¶15

wherein he has stated that the petitioner has already deposited Rs.3 lakhs and he has prayed the Court to dispose of the said Civil Revision Petition by recording his undertaking that he, on behalf of the petitioner, will pay the balance amount of Rs.5 lakhs to the respondent within eight months from 07.04.2014. He has also prayed in the affidavit that a direction may be given to the respondent not to press E.P.No.157 of 2007 in O.S.No.157 of 2004 (inclusive of the proceedings in E.A.Nos.173 and 174 of 2012, dated 20.06.2013) on the file of the learned IV Additional Senior Civil Judge, Guntur for eight months i.e., till the expiry of the time mentioned by the petitioner for payment of the amount.

¶16

Sri K.S.Murthy, the learned counsel for the respondent in both the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal and the Civil Revision Petition, stated that though the time being requested by the appellant/petitioner is too long, in order to put a quietus to the litigation, his client is willing to the offer made by the appellant/petitioner, subject, however, to the direction that may be issued by this Court that the appellant/petitioner shall not transfer or create third party interests over all the movable articles belonging to the school which are lying in the suit schedule premises.

¶17

In the light of the above facts and circumstances of the case, the affidavit filed by Sri T.V.Sambasiva Rao, on behalf of the appellant and the petitioner in the C.M.A. and C.R.P., respectively, is placed on record and both the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal and the Civil Revision Petition are disposed of with the direction to the petitioner not to alienate or create third party interests over all the movable articles belonging to the school till the payment of the balance amount of Rs.5 lakhs is made within the time undertaken in the affidavit.

¶18

The respondent is permitted to withdraw the sum of Rs.3 lakhs deposited by the petitioner without furnishing any security. On deposit of the balance amount of Rs.5 lakhs, the respondent is entitled to withdraw the same without furnishing any security. Both the parties can, thereafter, file appropriate applications for closing the above-mentioned E.P. and E.As. For a period of eight months, the lower Court shall not proceed with the EP and all EAs pending in the E.P.

¶19

As a sequel to disposal of the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal and the Civil Revision Petition, interim order, dated 10.07.2013, in CRPMP.No.3946 of 2013 is vacated and CRPMP.Nos.3946 and 7313 of 2013 and CMAMP.No.1253 of 2013 are disposed of as infructuous.

¶20

JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY

¶21

10^th April, 2014 DR

Tripplar School of Learning v. Mannava Bapaiah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tripplar School of Learning v. Mannava Bapaiah

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

The Administrator of the Specified Undertaking of the Vs M/s Allwyn Watches Limited (in Liquidation)

G. Gurootham Vs Sirsilk Limited. (in liquidation)

Safeeya Begum Vs Sirsilk Limited. (in liquidation)

Smt. Thota Pushpalatha Vs Sri. G.Vijaya Kumar

Tripplar School of learning Vs Mannava Bapaiah

Asset Reconstruction Company (India)Ltd., Vs M/s Smithand Kenner Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd.