Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.B.BALAJI, J
M.Ponmozhi – Appellant
Versus
M.Alli – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. clarification of status quo order. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. execution court's findings upheld. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. statutory independence of execution applications. (Para 6 , 8) |
| 4. interim orders merge with final rulings. (Para 7) |
For Plaintiffs : Mr.R.Singaravelan, Senior Counsel for Mr.M.Eghambaram For defendants : Mr.V.Girishankar for D2 ********** O R D E R This Application has been filed seeking clarification of my order dated 14.06.2024 granting status quo in E.P. No. 4715 of 2023 pending before the IX Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.
2. I have heard Mr.R.Singaravelan, learned Senior Counsel for Mr.M.Eghambaram, learned counsel for the plaintiffs and Mr.V.Girishankar, learned counsel for the second defendant.
3.The learned Senior Counsel would contend that while taking up Application in A.No.2454 of 2024 in C.S. No.344 of 2014, on 14.06.2024, I had passed an order granting status quo in the Execution Proceedings in E.P. No.4715 of 2023 pending before the IX Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.
4. The learned Senior Counsel would submit that the said order of status quo should be granted till disposal of the suit in C.S. No.344 of 2014 since otherwise, the
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
