Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SANKARAN NAIR versus STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


SANKARAN NAIR v. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE - WP(C) No. 18921 of 2007(C) [2007] RD-KL 10806 (20 June 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 18921 of 2007(C)

1. SANKARAN NAIR,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE,
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.JESWIN P.VARGHESE

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN

Dated :20/06/2007

O R D E R

M.N. KRISHNAN, J.

WP(C).No. 18921 OF 2007 C

Dated this the 20th June, 2007.



JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed seeking to set aside the order in E.P.21/06 in DLSA 411/04. The decree holder viz., State Bank of Travancore has filed the application for realisation of the decree debt by arrest and detention of the writ petitioner in civil prison. Admittedly, the writ petitioner is an employee of the BSNL. He has also filed a counter that he is not having sufficient means to pay the decree debt. He has also produced copies of the pay slips. It is seen that his gross salary is about Rs.11802/- deduction is also very substantial and the carry home salary is within a range of Rs.635/- to Rs.900/- per month. The learned Munsiff held that salary certificate is produced and it will show that the judgment debtor has the means to pay the decree debt. It is not correct on a prima facie perusal. But larger questions may arise that if it is in the form of a saving whether such deductions can be taken into consideration for claiming protection against arrest. But matter has not been considered in those angles at all and therefore the order passed by the learned Munsiff requires interference and it is set aside. The matter is remitted back to the learned Munsiff to consider WPC 18921/07 2 the matter afresh, after permitting the decree holder as well as the judgment debtor to let in evidence in support of their respective contentions. If additional evidence or document is necessary that also may be produced and the matter be disposed of within a period of two months from today. Till that date the order of arrest shall stand deferred. Writ petition is disposed of accordingly. M.N.KRISHNAN Judge jj


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.