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

2014 Supreme(Online)(KER) 6266

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
K.HARILAL, J
CHERIYAKOYA SO AISHABY RESIDING AT – Appellant
Versus
HUSSAIN SO THANGAKOYA RESIDING AT – Respondent


ORDER

The revision petitioners are the decree holders in O.S.

No.2/2000 on the files of the Munsiff's Court, Androth as well as the petitioners in E.P.No.2/07 filed therein. In the above case, a decree was passed against the respondents/defendants restraining them from evicting the plaintiffs or interfering with the right of residence in the House No.C4-244 situated in the plaint schedule property. The above E.P. was filed under Order XXI Rule 32(1), (2) and (5) of the Code of Civil Procedure on the allegation that on 8-2-2007 the respondents/defendants intentionally demolished the decree schedule house, while the petitioners were away from the house, which has been used by the petitioners and situated in the plaint schedule property. That apart, the judgment debtors sold their household articles worth Rs.75,000/- belong to the decree holders and thus the judgment debtors willfully violated the decree of the court. The act of the judgment debtors is clear disobedience of the order of the court and violation of the decree passed in O.S. No.2/2000.

2. The respondents denied the demolition of the building and sale of the articles belonged to the decree holders. According to them, the de

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