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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 5738

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
T.R.RAVI, J
GEROGE IYPE – Appellant
Versus
MATHEW – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.NEERAJ NARAYAN, SRI.DENNY VARGHESE
For the Respondents: SRI.MANU VYASAN PETER, SRI.P.B.SUBRAMANYAN, SRI.SABU GEORGE, SMT.MEERA P.

JUDGMENT

The petitioners have challenged Ext.P4 order whereby the review petition filed by the petitioner against Ext.P3 order finding that the execution petition is maintainable has been dismissed. The petitioners are the defendants in the suit, which was decreed based on compromise. The contention in the E.P is that the petitioners had violated terms of the compromise, which were in the nature of a prohibitory injunction. The petitioners on the other hand submitted that about fifteen years after the decree the execution petition has been filed and it is not maintainable. The court found that since it is in the nature of a prohibitory injunction, the execution petition is maintainable. The review petition filed has also been dismissed, finding that the question as to whether there has been a violation of the terms of the compromise is a matter for evidence and cannot be decided at this stage. I do not find any legal infirmity in the order of the court below. This original petition fails and is dismissed.

Sd/-

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