Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

JANARDHANAN versus THE VETTOM SERVICE CO

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


JANARDHANAN v. THE VETTOM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE - WP(C) No. 16258 of 2006(I) [2007] RD-KL 11556 (29 June 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 16258 of 2006(I)

1. JANARDHANAN,
... Petitioner

2. VELAYUDAN,

3. ABDU REHIMAN,

Vs

1. THE VETTOM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.A.KRISHNAN

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE

Dated :29/06/2007

O R D E R

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J.

W.P.(C) No. 16258 OF 2006

Dated this the 29th day of June, 2007



JUDGMENT

There is no appearance for the respondent-decree holder who has been served with notice. Impugned in this Writ Petition under Article 227 filed by the judgment debtor is Ext.P2 order of the execution court by which that court has found that the petitioner-judgment debtor is having sufficient means has willfully neglected to pay and on that basis ordered warrant for his arrest and detention.

2. Submissions of Mr.A.Krishnan, counsel for the petitioner notwithstanding, I am not persuaded to hold that the impugned order is vitiated to such an extent as to warrant correction under the supervisory jurisdiction. The learned Munsiff had the evidence consisting of oral testimony-PW1 decree holder and also Ext.A1 copy of the registered sale deed in favour of the petitioner to support the above finding. The respondent had not adduced any counter evidence. Under these circumstances Ext.P2 cannot be said to be faulty. At the time when this Writ Petition came up for admission, this court granted stay on condition that the petitioner should deposit an amount of Rs.3,000/- before the court below within two months from 23.06.06. The submission of Mr.Krishnan that the above condition has been complied WPC No.16258 of 2006 2 with by the petitioner, is not resisted by anybody. Even as I refuse to interfere with Ext.P2, I am inclined to dispose of the Writ Petition directing that the order of stay will continue further on condition that the petitioner pays on the first of every month commencing from 1st of August 2007 at the rate of Rs.2,000/- till such time as he discharges the entire decree debt. Once it is seen that the entire debt is wiped off, it is open to the petitioner to file an application for recording full satisfaction. The court below will hear both sides and take a decision, if such application is filed. In the event of any two defaults in the matter of remitting the installments, the petitioner will forfeit the benefits of this judgment.

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE

btt WPC No.16258 of 2006 3


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.