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

2002 Supreme(Ker) 159

R.BHASKARAN, S.SANKARASUBBAN
Anthony – Appellant
Versus
Kunjavarankutty Hajee – Respondent


Judgment :-

Sankarasubban, J.

These two appeals are filed against the orders in E.A. No. 131 of 1999 and E.A. No. 87 of 2000 in O.S. No. 644 of 1992 on the file the Sub Court, Tirur. E.F.A. No. 43 of 2001 is filed against the order in E.A. No. 131 of 1999, while E.F.A. No. 44 of 2001 is filed against the order in E.A. No. 87 of 2000. Both these are claim petitions filed under order 21 Rule 58 of the code of civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as C.P.C.).

2. Appellant, in both these appeals, Anthony is the decree holder in O.S. No. 644 of 1992 of the Sub Court, Irinjalakuda. He filed the suit against the defendant - T.V. Viswanathan for recovery of money. After the filing of the suit, the appellant herein attached before judgment two items of properties by filing POP No. 22 of 1988. These two items of properties are 34.25 cents in Sy. No. 297/4A and 1 acre and 28 cents in Sy. No. 268/2. On 27.2.1988, the court called upon the respondent- Viswanathan to furnish security and to satisfy the plaint claim on or before 30.3.1988. It also issued conditional order. Since no security was furnished the property was attached on 1.3.1988.

3. It appears that thereafter, a claim petition was fi





















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