Back
Kuriakose – Appellant
Versus
Johnson – Respondent
ORDER :
V.G. Arun, J.
The revision petitioner is the second judgment debtor in E.P No.1670 of 2018 in O.S.No.300 of 2016 of the Additional Munsiff's Court, Irinjalakuda. The suit for return of money filed by the respondent against the revision petitioner and another was settled through mediation and a compromise decree passed. As per the terms of the compromise, the first judgment debtor was to pay an amount of Rs. 26,50,000/- to the decree holder on or before 31.08.2016 and the second judgment debtor/revision petitioner was to pay Rs. 52,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 18% from 30.05.2015, plus an additional sum of Rs. 10,00,000/-. The amount due under the decree was charged over the immovable properties of the revision petitioner.
2. As the revision petitioner failed to discharge the decree debt, the respondent filed E.P.No.4363 of 2017, seeking to realise the amount from the immovable properties of the revision petitioner. Thereupon, it came to light that there was already a charge over the properties at the behest of the Punjab National Bank. Therefore, that execution petition could not be proceeded with and was dismissed. The respondent thereupon filed E.P.No.1670 of 2018 s
The court clarified that mere default in paying a decree is insufficient for incarceration; evidence of bad faith and refusal to pay despite having means is required.
Arrest of a judgment-debtor in civil proceedings requires strict adherence to procedural safeguards and evidence of willful neglect to pay.
Arrest of a judgment-debtor for non-payment requires evidence of bad faith or willful neglect, and other execution methods must be considered first.
The judgment emphasized the requirement of evidence to establish the judgment-debtor's means to discharge the decree amount and highlighted the need to prove an attitude of refusal to pay, beyond mer....
The judgment debtor's means to discharge the decree amount and the proper procedure for requesting an installment decree under the Code of Civil Procedure were central to the Court's decision.
The burden lies on the decree-holder to prove that the judgment-debtor has the means to pay the decretal amount and is willfully evading payment, following the procedures laid out in the CPC.
Provisions under Section 51 C.P.C. read with Rule 37 of Order and (sic. are) concerned in the interest of the protection of the liberty and freedom of the J. Dr. which the Code considers to be of par....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
