High Court of KeralaWP(C)/21136/2013closed

K.Noushad v. The Village Officer, Kallissery

2015-07-20Honourable Mr.Justice K.Vinod Chandran3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JULY 2015/29TH ASHADHA, 1937 WP(C).No. 21136 of 2013 (N) ---------------------------- E.P.NO.49/2010 IN O.P.NO.66/2008 OF DISTRICT COURT, THALASSERY ------------------ PETITIONER(S):

-------------------------- K.NOUSHAD, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.IBRAHIM, "KEERIRAKATH HOUSE", KALLIASSERY, MANGAD P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT - 670 562.

BY ADV. SRI.T.K.SASINDRAN RESPONDENT(S) :

----------------------------

1. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KALLISSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT - 670 562.

2. SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE CO. LTD., KANNUR BRANCH, REPRESENTED BY ITS P.A.HOLDER, K.DASAN, S/O.KRISHNAN, AGED 63 YEARS, CONSULTANT, SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE CO.LTD., KANNUR - 670 001.

3. K.MUHAMMED KUNHI, AGED 42 YEARS, C/O.SAMEERA, (W/O.K.MOHAMMED KUNHI), KALLOURIYAKATH HOUSE, MANGAD P.O., KALLIASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT - 670 562.

4. RAMAKRISHNAN, AGED 40 YEARS MOTTAMMAL HOUSE, KANNAPURAM, KALLIASSERY KANNUR DISTRICT - 670 562.

R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.S.JAMAL R2 BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH NAMBIAR R4 BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20-07-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Msd.

WP(C).No. 21136 of 2013 (N) ----------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :

----------------------------------------- EXT.P1:

TRUE COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE THE DISTRICT COURT, THALASSERY VIDE E.P.NO.49/2010 IN O.P. NO.66/2008. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :

------------------------------------------- NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE.

Msd.

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.

--------------------------------------- W.P(C). No.21136 of 2013 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of July, 2015.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is aggrieved with the recovery proceedings taken against the petitioner in E.P. No.49 of 2010 in O.P. No.66 of 2008 by the District Court, Thalassery. The petitioner's contention is that, the 3rd respondent, who is the brother of the petitioner, had availed a loan from the 2nd respondent, giving the address of the petitioner. The petitioner, if aggrieved with the proceedings taken by the Court in the Execution Petition, has to approach the said Court and put forth his objections there. The writ petition would stand closed, reserving the above liberty.

Sd/- K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE sp