Dhana mithra Pvt Limited vs Ragesh — 301932/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Order21Rule10,11. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED on 20th May 2026.
EP - EXECUTION PETITION
CNR: KLTR140026792024
e-Filing Number
24-08-2024
Filing Number
302744/2024
Filing Date
24-Aug-2024
Registration No
301932/2024
Registration Date
29-Aug-2024
Court
Munsiff Court, Irinjalakuda
Judge
2-Additional Munsiff
Decision Date
20-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--DISMISSED
Last updated 15-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Dhana mithra Pvt Limited
Adv. THOMAS E T, THOMAS E T
Respondent(s)
-
1.Ragesh
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
20-May-2026
OrderView PDF
The Court of the Munsiff, Irinjalakuda dismissed the execution petition filed by Dhanamithra Kuries Pvt. Ltd. against Ramesh (10th judgment debtor), holding it not maintainable. The court found that since the original decree was passed only against defendants 1 and 4-7 (with suits against defendants 2 and 3 having abated), execution proceedings could not be initiated against Ramesh, who is merely a legal heir of the deceased 3rd defendant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
20-May-2026
Disposed
Additional Munsiff
-
16-Mar-2026
Order/ Judgement
Additional Munsiff
-
23-Feb-2026
Settlement of proclamation
Additional Munsiff
-
05-Feb-2026
Call on
Additional Munsiff
-
12-Jan-2026
Call on
Additional Munsiff
-
19-Dec-2025
For production of documents/Affidavit
Additional Munsiff
-
15-Dec-2025
Call on
Additional Munsiff
-
17-Oct-2025
For production of documents/Affidavit
Additional Munsiff
-
26-Aug-2025
For Counter
Additional Munsiff
-
25-Jun-2025
For Counter
Additional Munsiff
-
27-Mar-2025
Issue notice
Additional Munsiff
-
15-Mar-2025
Issue Rule 22 notice to Jd
Additional Munsiff
-
16-Dec-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
24-Aug-2024
Case filed
Registration No. 301932/2024
The Court of the Munsiff, Irinjalakuda dismissed the execution petition filed by Dhanamithra Kuries Pvt. Ltd. against Ramesh (10th judgment debtor), holding it not maintainable. The court found that since the original decree was passed only against defendants 1 and 4-7 (with suits against defendants 2 and 3 having abated), execution proceedings could not be initiated against Ramesh, who is merely a legal heir of the deceased 3rd defendant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts