SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(Kar) 593

A.M.FAROOQ
MARY LAZAR – Appellant
Versus
KRISHNA GOPAL – Respondent


Advocates:
H.J.Sanghvi, M.Erappa Reddy

., J.

( 1 ) THIS revision petition is filed by the legal representatives of the decree-holder in h. r. c. No. 2022 of 1994 on the file of the learned small causes judge, bangalore. This revision petition is filed under Section 1. 15 of the cpc assailing the Order dated 18-3-2002 in execution case No. 273 of 1999 on the file of the learned additional small causes judge, bangalore dismissing the execution petition filed by the petitioners.

( 2 ) I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

( 3 ) WHEN this revision petition had come up for admission on 1-7-2002, on finding prima facie, that the impugned Order cannot be sustained, I directed issue of emergent notice to the respondent so as to give an opportunity to the respondent and to dispose off the matter. Thereafter, the respondent has been served and the respondent is represented by Sri Sangvi, the learned counsel who fully supported the impugned Order and contended that even though the original landlady had secured an Order of eviction in the h. r. c. case, that Order was granted to her on a compromise between her and the respondent, and that too, in view of











Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top