M/s The Bombay Burmah Trading Corporation Ltd, Mudis Rep.Group Manager vs Manivannan — 13/2022
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section UO21R1(2). Status: Enquiry. Next hearing: 09th June 2026.
EP - Execution Petition
CNR: TNCB150003902022
Next Hearing
09th June 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
54/2022
Filing Date
28-10-2022
Registration No
13/2022
Registration Date
28-10-2022
Court
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Valparai
Judge
1-DISTRICT MUNSIF CUM JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
M/s The Bombay Burmah Trading Corporation Ltd, Mudis Rep.Group Manager
Adv. T.Paulpandi, B.A.,B.L.,Ms.No.658/1994
Respondent(s)
Manivannan
Hearing History
Judge: 1-DISTRICT MUNSIF CUM JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
Enquiry
Enquiry
Enquiry
Enquiry
Enquiry
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 21-04-2026 | Enquiry | |
| 07-04-2026 | Enquiry | |
| 17-03-2026 | Enquiry | |
| 10-03-2026 | Enquiry | |
| 02-03-2026 | Enquiry |
Interim Orders
Summary The petition filed by S.M. Manivannan seeking to stay execution proceedings in original suit case No. 176/2012 has been dismissed. The court found that the petitioner failed to satisfy the mandatory requirements under Order 21 Rule 26 CPC, as no appeal or stay application was filed before the trial court or appellate court despite having 5+ years since the original judgment. The court upheld that execution stay orders under CPC Rule 26 are only meant to provide reasonable time for judgment-debtors to approach higher forums, not indefinite stay. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The petition filed by S.M. Manivannan seeking to stay execution proceedings in original suit case No. 176/2012 has been dismissed. The court found that the petitioner failed to satisfy the mandatory requirements under Order 21 Rule 26 CPC, as no appeal or stay application was filed before the trial court or appellate court despite having 5+ years since the original judgment. The court upheld that execution stay orders under CPC Rule 26 are only meant to provide reasonable time for judgment-debtors to approach higher forums, not indefinite stay. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts