The Vadattupara Rural Co operative Society Ltd. vs Joy Kuriakose Advocate - Sherman A. Geroge — 200013/2023

Case under Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Section S76. Status: For production of documents/Affidavit. Next hearing: 20th May 2026.

EP - EXECUTION PETITION

CNR: KLER500000862023

For production of documents/Affidavit

Next Hearing

20th May 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

200118/2023

Filing Date

15-03-2023

Registration No

200013/2023

Registration Date

15-03-2023

Court

Sub Court , Muvattupuzha

Judge

1-SUB JUDGE

Acts & Sections

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Section S76

Petitioner(s)

The Vadattupara Rural Co operative Society Ltd.

Adv. George Mathew, K. T Mathew, Jain Varghese, Stephy K. Regi

Respondent(s)

Joy Kuriakose Advocate - Sherman A. Geroge

Hearing History

Judge: 1-SUB JUDGE

27-03-2026

For production of documents/Affidavit

09-03-2026

For production of documents/Affidavit

09-02-2026

For production of documents/Affidavit

27-01-2026

For production of documents/Affidavit

14-01-2026

Call on

Interim Orders

06-06-2025
Order

Summary: The petition filed by judgment debtor Joy Kuriakose under Section 151 CPC was allowed. The court directed the decree holder (Vadattuppara Rural Co-operative Society) to produce the valuation report prepared at the time of granting the loan and ordered the execution proceedings to be posted for inquiry into the market value of the property. The court found that due to wide disparity between the upset price (₹10,50,000) and claimed actual value, an independent valuation was necessary to enable prospective purchasers to fairly assess the property being sold at auction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The petition filed by judgment debtor Joy Kuriakose under Section 151 CPC was allowed. The court directed the decree holder (Vadattuppara Rural Co-operative Society) to produce the valuation report prepared at the time of granting the loan and ordered the execution proceedings to be posted for inquiry into the market value of the property. The court found that due to wide disparity between the upset price (₹10,50,000) and claimed actual value, an independent valuation was necessary to enable prospective purchasers to fairly assess the property being sold at auction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Sub Court , Muvattupuzha All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case