The Vadattupara Rural Cooperative Society Ltd. vs Aliyas P. E Advocate - Sherman A. Geroge — 200016/2023

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

EP - EXECUTION PETITION

CNR: KLER500000892023

For production of documents/Affidavit

Next Hearing

20th May 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

200121/2023

Filing Date

15-03-2023

Registration No

200016/2023

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 Cooperative Society Ltd.

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

Respondent(s)

Aliyas P. E Advocate - Sherman A. Geroge

Joy Kuriakose

Adv. 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

Call on

14-01-2026

Call on

Interim Orders

06-06-2025
Order

SUMMARY: The petition filed by judgment debtors under Section 151 CPC was allowed. The court directed the decree-holder bank to produce the valuation report prepared at the time of granting the loan and ordered that the execution proceeding be posted for independent inquiry into the market value of the property, citing a wide disparity between the upset price of ₹12,85,000 proposed by the bank and the judgment debtors' claim that the property is worth significantly more. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

SUMMARY: The petition filed by judgment debtors under Section 151 CPC was allowed. The court directed the decree-holder bank to produce the valuation report prepared at the time of granting the loan and ordered that the execution proceeding be posted for independent inquiry into the market value of the property, citing a wide disparity between the upset price of ₹12,85,000 proposed by the bank and the judgment debtors' claim that the property is worth significantly more. 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