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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 56025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
BIJI ABRAHAM – Appellant
Versus
SHIBU MATHEW – Respondent
OP(CRL.) NO. 354 OF 2021 | CMP NO.10069 OF 2015



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.C.S.MANILAL, SRI.S.NIDHEESH
For the Respondents: SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR-SRI.A.VIPIN NARAYAN

Delay in executing a court order is the petitioner's responsibility, leading to the dismissal of the petition.

Headnote:This judgment pertains to OP(CRL.) NO. 354 OF 2021, where the petitioner sought orders against the delay in executing a previous court order. The court found the delay attributable to the petitioner’s inaction. The petition was dismissed, allowing the petitioner to pursue execution proceedings. Key issues included the authority of the Magistrate and responsibilities of the parties involved. The court emphasized timely action is crucial for legal remedies.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's request for timely execution review. (Para 1 , 2)
2. delay attributed to petitioner's inaction. (Para 3)

O R D E R Dated this the 15th day of December, 2025 The petitioner in MC.No.138/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Ettumanoor filed this petition praying for a direction to the learned Magistrate to consider and dispose of Exhibit P2 application for execution of Exhibit P1 order expeditiously.

2. In the light of the above prayer in this OP, a report was called for from the learned Magistrate about the reason for the delay in execution of Exhibit P1 order. As per report dated 24.11.2025, the learned Magistrate reported that though distress warrant was ordered against the counter petitioner as early as on 27.8.2022, no steps were taken by the petitioner herein for issuing distress warrant till date.

3. In the above circumstance, it is revealed that the delay in execution of Exhibit P1 order is due to the default of the petitioner himself and as such this OP is liable to be dismissed.

In the result, this OP is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to proceed with the execution proceedings pending before the learned Magistrate.

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 Back to top