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

2007 Supreme(Mad) 1136

K.VENKATARAMAN
N. C. Duraisamy Naidu – Appellant
Versus
K. Pappaiya Naidu – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:K.A. Ravindran, Advocate. For the Respondent:
R. Margabandhu, Advocate.

Judgment :-

1. The present revision has been filed by the Judgment-debtor questioning the order passed in E.P. No.35/2005 in O.S. No.317/1999 by the learned Subordinate Judge, Gudiyattam, Vellore District dated 4. 2006.

2. The respondent/decree holder has filed a Suit against the petitioner/judgment-debtor in O.S. No.317/99 and obtained money decree. To execute the same, the respondent herein has filed E.P. No.35 of 2005 under Order 21, Rule 37, C.P.C. Counter has been filed by the petitioner herein repudiating the contentions raised in the Execution Petition. The learned Trial Judge after considering the matter in issue has held that arrest cannot be ordered against the petitioner/judgment debtor as he has possessed property. However, the learned Trial Judge directed the petitioner/judgment-debtor to pay the decree amount in installment at Rs.5,000/- per month failing which arrest will be ordered. Challenging the said order the present Revision has been filed.

3. Mr. K.A. Ravindran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the learned Trial Judge has not given any finding that the petitioner/judgment-debtor has means to pay the decree amount. The learned Trial




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