Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Jagadeesan and ors. Vs. Jayapriya Chit Funds (P) Limited.

Jagadeesan and ors. vs Jayapriya Chit Funds (P) Limited.

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jun 04, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/927927

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
C.R.P.(NPD) No.1983 of 2012 and M.P.No.1 of 2012
Subject
Civil

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Civil

Key legal issue
Civil
Acts & sections
Code of Civil Procedure,(CPC) 1908 - Section 115,

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Jagadeesan and ors.

Advocate Mr.P.Mani, Adv.

Respondent

Jayapriya Chit Funds (P) Limited.

Legal References

Excerpt

this civil revision petition is preferred under section 115 of the civil procedure code as against the order of attachment of salary dated 24.02.2012 passed by the learned district munsif cum judicial magistrate, neyveli in e.p.no.276 of 2012 in a.r.no.50 of 2010.order1. heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the records.2. this civil revision petition is focussed as against the order of attachment of salary dated 24.02.2012 passed by the learned district munsif cum judicial magistrate, neyveli in e.p.no.276 of 2012 in a.r.no.50 of 2010.3. the germane facts can be encapsulated thus:the court below in the execution petition ordered attachment for recovering a total sum of rs.52,672/- and in that connection, recoveries have been effected from the salary of the petitioners.3. the grievance of the judgment debtors is that despite the aforesaid amount having been recovered, the officer concerned is going on recovering further amounts without any stoppage. as such, the grievance of the petitioners in my considered opinion, could be adequately redressed by passing the following direction to the presiding officer of the executing courtthe presiding officer of the executing court is directed to verify personally as to how much amount has been recovered so far from the petitioners in connection with the said execution petition and shall see that there is no excess recovery over and above the scope of the execution petition.4. with the above direction, this civil revision petition is disposed of. no costs. consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Full Judgment

This civil revision petition is preferred under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code as against the order of attachment of salary dated 24.02.2012 passed by the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Neyveli in E.P.No.276 of 2012 in A.R.No.50 of 2010.

ORDER

1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the records.

2. This civil revision petition is focussed as against the order of attachment of salary dated 24.02.2012 passed by the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Neyveli in E.P.No.276 of 2012 in A.R.No.50 of 2010.

3. The germane facts can be encapsulated thus:

The court below in the Execution Petition ordered attachment for recovering a total sum of Rs.52,672/- and in that connection, recoveries have been effected from the salary of the petitioners.

3. The grievance of the judgment debtors is that despite the aforesaid amount having been recovered, the officer concerned is going on recovering further amounts without any stoppage. As such, the grievance of the petitioners in my considered opinion, could be adequately redressed by passing the following direction to the Presiding Officer of the Executing Court

The Presiding Officer of the Executing Court is directed to verify personally as to how much amount has been recovered so far from the petitioners in connection with the said Execution petition and shall see that there is no excess recovery over and above the scope of the Execution Petition.

4. With the above direction, this civil revision petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial