IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
T.R.RAVI, J
IYPE MANI – Appellant
Versus
R RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR – Respondent
JUDGMENT
The prayer in the original petition is to set aside Ext.P5 order dated 6.9.2024 in E.P. No.44 of 2018 in O.S. No.30 of 2014 on the files of the Subordinate Judge’s Court, Mavelikara. By the said order, the petitioner was committed to civil prison for a period of three months. It is submitted that the petitioner has thereafter been released.
2. The case of the petitioner is that the order was issued without complying with the procedure prescribed under Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure . The power under Order XXI Rule 37 is discretionary and is to be exercised after directing the judgment debtor to show cause why he should not be committed to civil prison. The order impugned does not show an exercise of discretion after directing the judgment debtor to show cause.
3. In the above circumstances, since the petitioner is already released, the original petition is disposed of by setting aside Ext.P5 order and directing the court below to proceed with the execution petition and take it to its logical conclusion. If it becomes necessary to detain the petitioner in civil prison, the court below shall comply with the procedure laid down in the Code of Civil Procedure .
SD/-
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.