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

2003 Supreme(Kar) 545

D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR
George Joseph – Appellant
Versus
M. Vikram Pai – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Mr. Sriyuthus P.N. Ramesh, P.K. Venkatesh Prasad, Irfan, Sheeja, Ravikiran, M.N. Sathyaprakash

ORDER

D.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.--This revision petition under Section 115 Code of Civil Procedure is by Judgment debtor Nos. 1 and 3 in Execution Case No. 7 of 2003 on the file of the Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Madikeri. The grievance that is sought to be redressed is only by the 1st Petitioner who was Defendant No. 3 in the execution proceedings.

2. Submission of the learned Counsel for the Petitioners is that the 1st Petitioner is only a director of the company which had received certain amounts as deposits and it has suffered certain adverse order before the District Consumer Redressal Forum, Madikeri and which order is sought to be executed before the Executing Court and a sum of Rs.29,294/- is sought to be realised pursuant to the proceedings which ended in favour of the applicant before the Consumer Redressal Forum, even by taking out execution proceedings as against the Petitioner also.

3. There is a delay of 38 days in filing this revision petition and an application praying for condonation of this delay is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act supported by an affidavit sworn to by the Managing Director of the 2nd Petitioner-company.

4. Perhaps this application could have





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