HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Click here to view full judgement.
B.S.VERMA, J. -
(1.) HEARD Mr. S.S. Chaudhary, Advocate for the revisionists and Mr.
Chandramauli Sah, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Neeraj Upreti, Advocate
for the respondents.
(2.) THIS revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 8.3.2011 passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division) Pithoragarh in Civil Execution Case No.1 of 2010, whereby said court has dismissed the
execution application of the revisionist as not maintainable.
(3.) BY a perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the executing court has misdirected itself in dismissing the application as
not maintainable. While doing so, the learned executing court placed
reliance upon a judgment of Kariyappa vs. Haladappa A.I.R. 1989 Karnataka
163, wherein it has been held that the initial onus to place the relevant material for an action against the judgment -debtor will be always on the
decree holder. Reliance was also placed upon Shivmurti Mahalingappa
Kuchnaur vs. Danamadvi Cycle Mart A.I.R. 1987 Karnatka 26, wherein same
view has been taken.
The executing court has held that no evidence was adduced before the executing court to this effect.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.