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

2017 Supreme(Del) 1336

VALMIKI J.MEHTA
CANARA BANK – Appellant
Versus
LUTHRA INDUSTRIES – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Baldev Malik and Mr. Arjun Malik, Advocates.

JUDGMENT :

VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J.

C.M. Appl. No. 10598/2017 (for exemption)

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

C.M. stands disposed of.

EX.F.A. 5/2017 and C.M. Appl. No. 10597/2017 (for stay)

1. This execution first appeal is filed by the appellant/decree holder/bank impugning the judgment of the executing court dated 21.1.2017 which has dismissed the execution petition filed by the appellant/bank on two counts. The first count for dismissing of the execution petition is that there is settlement and satisfaction of the decree in terms of One Time Settlement (OTS) offer accepted by the appellant/bank and the second count is that a decree cannot be executable against an immovable property, inasmuch as, the immovable property is a residential property and hence exempted from attachment in Delhi under Section 60(1) (ccc) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC). Reference to the judgment debtors in this case is reference to the legal heirs of original judgment debtor no. 2/defendant no. 2/Mr. Rajindra Kumar Malhotra.

2. Admittedly, the appellant/bank received a sum of Rs.6,25,000/- in terms of the OTS offer given by the judgment debtors. This OTS offer to the appellant/bank wa






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