SUMA Vs. SINIMOL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this Original Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges legality of the sale proclamation drawn by the Family Court, Irinjalakuda in E.P.No.11 of 2013 in O.P.No.673 of 2005. The petitioner claims that she is a co-owner of the property proclaimed for sale and in negation of her right in the property, steps for sale have been taken. She, therefore, has filed this Original Petition seeking to set aside Ext.P6 proclamation schedule drawn in E.P.No.11 of 2013 in O.P.No.673 of 2005 (wrongly noted as O.P.No.783 of 2005 in Ext.P6).

(2.) On 1/9/2022, the Original Petition was admitted and notice was directed to be served on the respondent. An order of interim stay was granted for a period of one month. Interim order was later extended for one more month on the condition that either the petitioner or the 2nd respondent-judgment debtor shall deposit Rs.2.00 lakhs before the Family Court, Irinjalakuda towards the decree debt, within two weeks.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent.