Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, J
U.K. ABDU – Appellant
Versus
M/S. KERALA GRAMIN BANK – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. judgment debtor's inability to pay as a defense in execution. (Para 1) |
| 2. challenge to execution based on failure of inquiry process. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. court's requirement to meet procedural safeguards. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. setting aside of warrant and order compliance with law. (Para 6) |
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is the judgment debtor in E.P No.31 of 2020 in O.S No.835 of 2014 on the files of the Court of the Munsiff Magistrate, Thamarassery. The respondent is the decree holder. The suit was decreed directing the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.5,40,283/- along with 9% interest from 31.10.2014 to 23.06.2015 and thereafter 6% interest till the realisation of the amount.
2. The respondent filed E.P No.31 of 2020 for execution of the decree. The petitioner entered appearance and filed objection stating that he has no means to pay the decree debt. He also filed Ext.P3 affidavit under Order XXI Rule 41(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short ‘CPC’), 1908. The respondent filed Ext.P4 objection to Ext.P3. The learned Munsiff, by Ext.P5 order, found that the petitioner has not produced any documents pertaining any ailments to show that he cannot earn a livelihood, although h
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
