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

1992 Supreme(Mad) 95

ABDUL HADI
T. S. Ranganathan – Appellant
Versus
P. R. Mohan Ram – Respondent


Appearing Advocates:V. Nicholas, Pushpa Sathyanarayanan, Advocates.

Judgment :-

The Order of the Court was as follows :

This revision is by the judgment-debtor/1st respondent in R.E.P. No. 25 of 1991 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Krishnagiri. The execution petition is for arrest of the petitioner with a view to realise the money decree obtained against him by the decree-holder-respondent herein. In the execution petition, initially notice was ordered to the judgment-debtor and he appeared before the Court and filed his counter. Then the execution Court passed an order of arrest inter alia stating,

"Means has been proved by affidavit. Hence the objection being untenable arrest the respondent by 31-12-1991".

2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court has repeatedly held that after the judgment-debtor appeared in court pursuant to the notice of arrest, the procedure prescribed under Order 21, R. 40, C.P.C. has to be followed. In other words, in such a situation the Court shall proceed to hear the decree-holder and take all such evidence as may be produced by him in support of his application for execution, and shall then give the judgment-debtor an opportunity of showing cause why he should not be committed to the civil prison









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