LATCHIYAVATHII vs SENTHILKUMAR — 42/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section ORDER 21 RULE 11. Disposed: Uncontested--Dismissed on 06th March 2026.
EP - Execution Petition
CNR: TNRM010047342024
e-Filing Number
30-08-2024
Filing Number
580/2024
Filing Date
13-09-2024
Registration No
42/2024
Registration Date
05-12-2024
Court
Principal District Court, Ramanathapuram
Judge
1-Principal District Judge
Decision Date
06th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--Dismissed
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
LATCHIYAVATHII
Adv. P.Venkatesan P.Venkatesan
PAPPA
Adv. P.Venkatesan P.Venkatesan
KAVITHA
Adv. P.Venkatesan P.Venkatesan
PALANI MURUGAN
Adv. P.Venkatesan P.Venkatesan
Respondent(s)
SENTHILKUMAR
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Principal District Judge
Disposed
For Attachment/ Arrest /Garnishee Proceedings / Deposit / Payment / Claim
For Attachment/ Arrest /Garnishee Proceedings / Deposit / Payment / Claim
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 06-02-2026 | For Attachment/ Arrest /Garnishee Proceedings / Deposit / Payment / Claim |
| 09-01-2026 | For Attachment/ Arrest /Garnishee Proceedings / Deposit / Payment / Claim |
| 19-12-2025 | Arguments |
| 15-12-2025 | Arguments |
Interim Orders
The Principal District Judge of Ramanathapuram allowed the execution petition and ordered the arrest of the judgment debtor Senthilkumar for non-payment of a Rs. 3,66,000 compensation award. The court held that an ex parte award remains executable unless formally set aside, and found that the respondent has sufficient means but purposely avoided payment, satisfying the requirements for arrest and civil prison detention by 09.01.2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Principal District Judge of Ramanathapuram allowed the execution petition and ordered the arrest of the judgment debtor Senthilkumar for non-payment of a Rs. 3,66,000 compensation award. The court held that an ex parte award remains executable unless formally set aside, and found that the respondent has sufficient means but purposely avoided payment, satisfying the requirements for arrest and civil prison detention by 09.01.2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts