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

2012 Supreme(Mad) 74

T.S.SIVAGNANAM
Senthil Kumar – Appellant
Versus
K. M. N. Surendran – Respondent


Advocates Appeared
For the Petitioners:N.C. Siddharth for T.R. Rajaraman, Advocates.
For the Respondent: No Appearance.

Judgment :-

1. This Revision filed under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code, is directed against the order made in E.P. No.92 of 2004 is A.C. No.5 of 2000, dated 3.9.2005 on the file of IV Additional District Munsif, Coimbatore.

2. The Respondent herein filed the Execution Petition under Order 21, Rule 37, C.P.C. for arrest and detention of the Petitioners to recover the decree amount in Arbitration Case No. 5 of 2000, awarded, by decree dated 26.8.2000.

3. The Petitioners resisted the Execution Petition contending that the Registrar of Chits without conducting any enquiry and without affording any opportunity, passed the decree. It is further contended the after the decree was passed, the Respondent gave the Title Deed and Promisory Note signed by the Petitioner and his wife to one Mr. Palanisamy, who has filed a Suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- by using the blank signed papers and the said Suit is pending and at this stage, the Respondent has filed the Execution Petition only with an intention to harass the Petitioners. The Executing Court, by order dated 30.9.2005, directed the arrest and detention of the Petitioners solely on the ground that the First Petition











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