M Jayakumar vs Lalithakumari Advocate - RADHAKRISHNAN S, RADHAKRISHNAN S — 200012/2023
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 21. Status: Call With IA. Next hearing: 06th June 2026.
EP - EXECUTION PETITION
CNR: KLTV330003042023
e-Filing Number
30-07-2023
Filing Number
234/2023
Filing Date
31-Jul-2023
Registration No
200012/2023
Registration Date
31-Jul-2023
Court
Sub Court Nedumangadu
Judge
1-Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
Last updated 06-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.M Jayakumar
Adv. N SATHEESH KUMAR
Respondent(s)
-
1.Lalithakumari Advocate - RADHAKRISHNAN S, RADHAKRISHNAN S
Case History
-
06-Jun-2026
Next hearingPending
-
04-Jun-2026
Call With IA
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
01-Jun-2026
For Hearing
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
29-May-2026
Call with Ea
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
26-May-2026
For hearing on Ea
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
25-May-2026
Sale
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
13-Mar-2026
OrderView PDF
Case Summary: EP 12/2023 in OS 218/2012 Outcome: Execution petition allowed. The court ordered the judicial sale of the judgment debtor's charged property (6.56 acres with building in Aruvikkara village, Thiruvananthapuram) to recover the decree amount. The upset price was fixed at Rs. 19,84,330/-, with sale scheduled for 25.05.2026 and sale report on 26.05.2026. Key Finding: The court held that the judgment debtor's settlement deed executed in favor of her husband on 27.06.2022 (after the decree was passed on 31.08.2016) constituted an alienation to defeat the decree and was therefore invalid. The decree amount of Rs. 19,58,098/- (with interest) remains recoverable from the charged property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
13-Mar-2026
Sale
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
04-Mar-2026
For Orders
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
19-Feb-2026
call on
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
30-Jan-2026
call on
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
03-Jan-2026
call on
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
20-Nov-2025
call on
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
22-Oct-2025
OrderView PDF
-
22-Oct-2025
call on
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
17-Sep-2025
call on
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
13-Aug-2025
Objection
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
25-Jul-2025
call on
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
01-Jul-2025
call on
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
13-Jun-2025
call on
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
24-Mar-2025
Issue Rule 66 notice to Jd
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
07-Mar-2025
Issue Rule 66 notice to Jd
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
06-Jan-2025
For Steps
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
16-Nov-2024
For Steps
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
30-Sep-2024
Objection
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
01-Aug-2024
Objection
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
30-May-2024
call on
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
01-Apr-2024
call on
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
01-Feb-2024
call on
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
01-Dec-2023
call on
Sub Judge And Assistant Sessions Judge Nedumangad
-
30-Sep-2023
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
31-Jul-2023
Case filed
Registration No. 200012/2023
Case Summary: EP 12/2023 in OS 218/2012 Outcome: Execution petition allowed. The court ordered the judicial sale of the judgment debtor's charged property (6.56 acres with building in Aruvikkara village, Thiruvananthapuram) to recover the decree amount. The upset price was fixed at Rs. 19,84,330/-, with sale scheduled for 25.05.2026 and sale report on 26.05.2026. Key Finding: The court held that the judgment debtor's settlement deed executed in favor of her husband on 27.06.2022 (after the decree was passed on 31.08.2016) constituted an alienation to defeat the decree and was therefore invalid. The decree amount of Rs. 19,58,098/- (with interest) remains recoverable from the charged property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts