Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
EA.No.557/2023

Case between Dr.S.Rajalekshmi vs Vellanad Service Co-operative bank Limited et al regarding execution of delivery of savings boxes.

Court
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Judge
Sri Mithun Gopi.G.S
Order Date
2025-01-22
Duration
Case Code No.
557
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Dr.S.Rajalekshmi filed a petition as the decree holder against Vellanad Service Co-operative bank Limited and others for the delivery of 1,750 savings boxes. The petitioner sought court intervention to ensure compliance with a prior order regarding these deliveries, which had been outstanding since 1996.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court allowed the petition, directing the respondents to take delivery of 1,750 boxes from the petitioner’s factory and make the necessary payments within 30 days. Failure to comply will result in the petitioner delivering the boxes at the respondents' expense.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Directed to take delivery of 1,750 boxes.
Case Type
Execution Petition
Final Judgment
No
The court allowed the petition, directing the respondents to take delivery of 1,750 boxes from the petitioner’s factory and make the necessary payments within 30 days. Failure to comply will result in the petitioner delivering the boxes at the respondents' expense.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court emphasized that prior orders were issued by the High Court, which the respondents failed to comply with.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court emphasized that prior orders were issued by the High Court, which the respondents failed to comply with.
Supporting Evidence
The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner has filed the execution petition in accordance with the final orders passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala... on the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents argued that the execution petition itself is not maintainable.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result: the petition is allowed as follows: (a) The respondents are directed to take delivery of 1,750 boxes from the petitioner’s factory godown at Pappanamcode as per Order Form No.1388 dated 17.01.1995 at their own expense within 30 days from today.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Dr.S.Rajalekshmi
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Vellanad Service Co-operative bank Limited
Relation
represented by its President
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Secretary,Vellanad Service Co-operative Society Limited
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Sasidharan Nair
Relation
Ex-president, Vellanad Service Co-operative bank Limited
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
G.K Namboothiry
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
R.Krishnappan Nair
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The respondents are directed to take delivery of 1,750 boxes from the petitioner’s factory godown at Pappanamcode within 30 days.
Evidence:
Therefore, this court is of the view that the petition is only liable to be allowed and resultantly, I order so.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The petitioner is directed to make arrangements to ensure the boxes are ready for dispatch when the respondents come to receive them.
Evidence:
(b) The petitioner herein is directed to make necessary arrangements to ensure that the boxes are kept ready for dispatch when the respondents come to the godown to receive the same.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
In case of refusal, the petitioner is directed to deliver the boxes to the office of the respondents at their own expense.
Evidence:
(c) If the respondents fail to take delivery from the petitioner’s factory godown at Pappanamcode as ordered above, the petitioner is directed to deliver the same to the office of the respondents at their own expense...
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The Station House Officer is directed to ensure smooth loading and unloading of the boxes.
Evidence:
(d) The Station House Officer, where the petitioner’s factory godown at Pappanamcode is situated and the office of the respondents is located, is directed to ensure that the loading from the petitioner’s factory godown at Pappanamcode and unloading at the office of the respondents is carried out smoothly without any hindrances.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Writ Petition
Submitted By: Unknown
Relevance:
This document was referenced as part of the background establishing the requirement for the respondents to take delivery of the savings boxes.
Reference:
WP(C) No.2027/2004 (E)
Document Type: Writ Appeal
Submitted By: Unknown
Relevance:
This document was cited to illustrate the legal authority directing the respondents to comply with the delivery and payment for the savings boxes.
Reference:
WA No.1389/2016
Document Type: Writ Petition
Submitted By: Unknown
Relevance:
This document was mentioned to support the petitioner's claim for enforcing the delivery of boxes.
Reference:
WP(C) No.26927/2004
Document Type: Award
Submitted By: Unknown
Relevance:
This award was cited as part of the directive for payment and delivery of the boxes as ordered in the execution proceedings.
Reference:
Ext.P5
Document Type: Order form
Submitted By: Unknown
Relevance:
This order form was referenced as part of the instructions for the delivery of the boxes.
Reference:
Order Form No.1388 dated 17.01.1995
Document Type: Oral Evidence
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
The court heard the arguments presented by both parties regarding the execution of the order.
Reference:

Case Classification

Case Type
Execution Petition
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
EA.NO.
Case Code Year
2023

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Wed, 01/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Fri, 01/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Bank

Similar Cases

Case between Pattom Service Cooperative Bank Limited vs Habeebullah regarding Execution Petition
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Execution Petition Defendant Won
Case between Pattom Service Co-operative Bank Limited et al vs Habeebullah regarding Execution Petition
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Execution Petition Defendant Won
Case between Kazhakoottam Service Co-operative Bank Ltd.No.1457 vs Prasad M.L regarding Execution petition
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Execution Petition Plaintiff Won
Case between Corporation Bank vs Conglomerate Web connect technologies Pvt Ltd et al regarding Execution Petition
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Execution Petition Defendant Won
Case between M/s Indian Bank vs Manoj V.B regarding Execution Petition
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Execution Petition Defendant Won