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

1951 Supreme(Ker) 45

KUNHI RAMAN, SUBRAMONIA.IYER
Kochu Vareed – Appellant
Versus
Mariam – Respondent


Judgment :-

The plaintiff - Decree-holder and his surety are the appellants. The proceedings in the court below were for restitution for which an execution petition was filed in respect of a sum of money drawn out by

the decree holder under an ex parte decree. The ex parte decree was passed on 9.10.1117 in O.S. 311 of 1117. In execution of that decree a certain amount standing to the credit of the judgment-debtor was proceeded against and a sum of Rs. 200 odd was brought into court and credited towards the decree. Thereupon, the decree-holder who had secured the exparte decree applied for payment out. This was granted subject to security being furnished. The surety who is one of the appellants in the present case was the person who furnished such security by executing a bond. Subsequently, the ex parte decree was set aside on application made by the judgment-debtor. This was done on 15.10.1118. The suit was heard in due course on the merits and ultimately a decree for Rs. 7 odd was passed on 28.11.1119. From this decision A.S. No. 50/1120 was preferred and the appellate court on 26.2.1121 confirmed the decision of the trial court. On 10.12.1122 E.P. 1334/1122 was filed on behalf 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