M S Kotak Mahindra Prime Ltd vs Shibu K — 100617/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Order XXI, Rule 10, Rule 11, r/w.39. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED on 18th March 2026.
EP - EXECUTION PETITION
CNR: KLKM030013092024
e-Filing Number
20-11-2024
Filing Number
102103/2024
Filing Date
20-Nov-2024
Registration No
100617/2024
Registration Date
22-Nov-2024
Court
WAKF Tribunal, Kollam
Judge
1-III Addl.SessionsJudge,Kollam
Decision Date
18-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--DISMISSED
Last updated 21-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.M S Kotak Mahindra Prime Ltd
Adv. MUHAMMED NAHAS
Respondent(s)
-
1.Shibu K
-
2.Santhosh Raghavan
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
18-Mar-2026
OrderView PDF
The court dismissed Kotak Mahindra Prime Ltd's execution petition (EP) against judgment debtors Santhosh Raghavan and Sajeev Bhavanam for lack of diligent prosecution. The court found that despite the decree holder being represented, no steps had been taken to issue a warrant against the judgment debtors, indicating non-diligent prosecution of the matter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
18-Mar-2026
Disposed
III Addl.SessionsJudge,Kollam
-
03-Feb-2026
Return of warrant
III Addl.SessionsJudge,Kollam
-
17-Dec-2025
Issue Arrest Warrant
III Addl.SessionsJudge,Kollam
-
06-Nov-2025
Issue Notice to judgment debtor
III Addl.SessionsJudge,Kollam
-
10-Sep-2025
Return of notice
III Addl.SessionsJudge,Kollam
-
25-Jun-2025
Notice in Ca
III Addl.SessionsJudge,Kollam
-
16-Apr-2025
Issue notice
III Addl.SessionsJudge,Kollam
-
05-Feb-2025
Issue notice
III Addl.SessionsJudge,Kollam
-
30-Nov-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
20-Nov-2024
Case filed
Registration No. 100617/2024
The court dismissed Kotak Mahindra Prime Ltd's execution petition (EP) against judgment debtors Santhosh Raghavan and Sajeev Bhavanam for lack of diligent prosecution. The court found that despite the decree holder being represented, no steps had been taken to issue a warrant against the judgment debtors, indicating non-diligent prosecution of the matter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts