Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MANICKAM, W/O.KANNAPPAN versus CANARA BANK, AGALI BRANCH

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


MANICKAM, W/O.KANNAPPAN v. CANARA BANK, AGALI BRANCH - WP(C) No. 951 of 2007(L) [2007] RD-KL 739 (10 January 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 951 of 2007(L)

1. MANICKAM, W/O.KANNAPPAN,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. CANARA BANK, AGALI BRANCH,
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.RAJESH NAMBIAR

For Respondent :SRI.P.GOPINATH

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

Dated :10/01/2007

O R D E R

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.

W.P.(C)NO. 951 OF 2007

DATED THIS THE 10th DAY OF JANUARY, 2007



JUDGMENT

This petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India challenging the order of executing Court for sale of attached property. The case of petitioner was that she is agriculturist and she filed Ext.P5 objection to the notice served on her under Rule 66 of Order XXI of Code of Civil Procedure whereunder petitioner claimed the benefit of the Bill proposed to be enacted by the Sate granting benefit to debtors like petitioner and therefore the execution proceedings is to be stayed and learned Sub Judge is to be directed to consider the objection and pass appropriate order.

2. Learned Counsel appearing for petitioner was heard.

3. Arguments of learned Counsel appearing for petitioner was that decree debt obtained by respondent is on an agriculture loan and she is entitled to the benefit of Kerala Farmers Debt Relief Commission Bill 2006 and as that aspect was not considered by learned Sub Judge, learned Sub Judge may be directed to consider the objection filed by petitioner to the execution petition.

4. Kerala Farmers Debt Relief Commission Bill has not so far W.P.(c)951/07 2 been enacted as an Act. If petitioner is entitled to the benefit under the Kerala Farmers Debt Relief Commission Bill , petitioner is at liberty to approach the executing Court claiming the benefit. If such an application is filed, executing Court has to consider the same and pass appropriate order in accordance with law. Petition disposed accordingly.

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,JUDGE

Acd W.P.(c)951/07 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.