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

2008 Supreme(Ker) 139

HARUN-UL-RASHID
Thankamma – Appellant
Versus
Leelamma Abraham – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:For the Petitioners:T.C. Mohandas, Advocate. For the Respondents:Bechu Kurian Thomas, Advocate.

Judgment :

This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the judgment dated 7.6.2006 in C.M.A. No.66 of 2005 on the file of the District Court, Kottayam. The execution court passed an order dismissing E.A. No.407 of 2003 in E.P. No.324 of 2000 in O.S. No.135 of 1997 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Kottayam. E.A. No.407 of 2003 was filed by the revision petitioner/judgment debtor under Order XXI Rule 90 C.P.C. to set aside the court sale conducted on 6.2003.

2. O.S. No. 135 of 1997 is a suit for realization of an amount of Rs.47,656/- with 12% interest from 23.1994 to 20.11.1999 and future interest at 6%. The respondent/decree-holder in execution of the decree in the said suit attached 41 cents of land belonging to the judgment debtor and the execution court sold the said property in court auction held on 6.2003. The decree-holder bid the auction and purchased the property for Rs.83,509/-. A petition for setting aside the sale was filed by the judgment debtor inter alia contending that there was no proper publication, that the sale is vitiated by fraud and that the petitioner sustained substantial injury as the property was sold for inadequate price. It was also contended



















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