Back
B. V. L. N. CHAKRAVARTHI
Pasupuleti Chakravarthy – Appellant
Versus
Pasupuleti Veera Venkata Satyanarayana Murthy – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. context of the revision petition (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. execution petition requirements and issues (Para 4 , 5 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. interpretation of order xxi rule 32 cpc (Para 6 , 7 , 12) |
| 4. basis of the execution petition (Para 8 , 9) |
| 5. conclusion of the petition dismissal (Para 13 , 14) |
ORDER :
(B.V.L.N. Chakravarthi, J.)
Heard Sri Sri Atchyut, learned counsel representing on behalf of Sri E.V.V.S.Ravi Kumar, learned counsel for the revision-petitioner and Sri Bolla Venkata Rama Rao, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. This revision-petition is directed against the Order, dated 18.12.2015 in E.P.No.44 of 2015 in O.P.No.42 of 2001 on the file of II Additional Senior Civil Judge’s Court, Kakinada. The execution petition was filed by the revision-petitioner/wife for ‘Restoration of Conjugal Rights’ under Order XXI Rule 32 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for brevity ‘CPC’). The execution petition was ‘Dismissed’ by the execution Court.
3. The revision-petitioner filed the execution petition with a prayer to direct the respondent/husband to restore conjugal rights.
4. The respondent/husband opposed the execution application that it is not maintainable in law.
5. The lear
The petitioner failed to prove illegal dispossession under Order XXI Rule 32 CPC, leading to the dismissal of her application for execution of the decree.
The decree-holder must prove that the judgment-debtor had an opportunity to obey the decree and willfully failed to obey it when seeking enforcement under Order XXI Rule 32 of the CPC.
The twin conditions of the judgment debtor's opportunity to obey the decree and wilful failure to obey it, as laid down in Order XXI Rule 32 CPC, are mandatory and coexistent, and the exceptional pow....
The court may dismiss an execution petition as unsatisfied if the judgment-debtor resides abroad and has no property in the jurisdiction. The decree-holder may be given liberty to file a fresh execut....
Maintenance orders under S.125 Cr.P.C. remain valid despite decrees for restitution of conjugal rights.
Court can exercise its supervisory jurisdiction under Art.227 to direct expeditious disposal of pending matrimonial petition.
Matrimonial proceedings are based on a continuing cause of action, and the withdrawal of a previous petition for restitution of conjugal rights does not preclude the filing of a subsequent petition f....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
