Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Easwaran S., J
Joseph – Appellant
Versus
Albuthaswamy – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. decree execution obstructed by defective claim petition. (Para 1) |
| 2. substantial questions on burden and certificate validity. (Para 3) |
| 3. arguments on decree-holder burden and certificate conclusiveness. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 4. obstructor bears proof burden in order xxi rule 97. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. purchase certificate invalid without notice during receivership. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
J U D G M E N T
The decree holder in OS No.40 of 1974, who filed EP No.444 of
2010 before the Principal Munsiff’s Court, Palakkad, for execution of the decree, faced a claim petition underSection 151of theCode of Civil Procedure, 1908which was considered as though it was an application under Order XXI Rule 97 of the . 2. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal are as follows:
The appellant/decree holder derived the right title and interest from one Hridayaswamy, pending a suit for partition. In the final decree proceedings, the property was in possession of the receiver. On 19.01.2011, the decree holder attempted to secure delivery of the property. The Amin, who went to deliver the property, was told that after the final decree was passed in OS No.40 o
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
