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

2017 Supreme(Mad) 2358

N.AUTHINATHAN
P. N. Peruvazhuthi – Appellant
Versus
K. Saravanan – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. G.A. Thiyagarajan.
For the Respondent: Mr. G. Ahokapathy for M/s. Pass Associates.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard both sides.

2. The facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal are as follows:

2.1. The appellant is the decree holder in O.S.No.15 of 2015. The respondent herein is the judgment debtor No.3. The appellant has taken steps to execute the decree passed in the said suit against the respondent. He has filed the Execution Petition in E.P.No.15 of 2008. He has filed E.A.No.3 of 2014 in E.P.No.107 of 2012 on the file of the learned District Judge, Thiruvannamalai under Section 340 of Cr.P.C. read with Section 157 C.P.C. alleging that the respondent herein committed an offence punishable under Section 193 I.P.C. in relation to the said execution proceedings. He requested the District Court to make a complaint for the offence under Section 193 I.P.C. to the Magistrate having jurisdiction.

2.2. The learned District Judge, Thiruvannamalai, dismissed E.A.No.3 of 2014 holding that Section 340 of Cr.P.C. is not applicable to a civil proceeding. Aggrieved by the order, the present appeal has been preferred.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that the Trial Court has erred in dismissing the petition as not maintainable. The learned counsel appearing


















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