Case Summary
PEPCO is the decree holder in this execution application, represented by its proprietor Thomas Yacob. P.P Corporation is the judgment debtor represented by Ajith Kumar.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Execution Petition
Final Judgment
No
The execution petition was dismissed as not pressed by the court.
Key Reasoning:
Why Defendant Won:
Supporting Evidence
Judgment Evidence:
Execution Petition dismissed as not pressed.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- PEPCO
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- P.P Corporation
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- M.Y Saju
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- R.Sivakumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Dismissed
Description:
Execution Petition dismissed as not pressed
Evidence:
Execution Petition dismissed as not pressed
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Execution Petition
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Kolenchery
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between PEPCO vs P.P Corporation regarding Execution Petition
Case Code Year
Case between PEPCO vs P.P Corporation regarding Execution Petition