Chetty v Pillay (18 of 2008) [2010] SCSC 8 (28 February 2010)

Chetty v Pillay (18 of 2008) [2010] SCSC 8 (28 February 2010)

No valid reason was advanced for stay of execution; the applicant exhausted all avenues to resist the claim and must comply with the affirmed order.

Citation
[2010] SCSC 8
Parties
Appellant: Nichol Chetty; Respondent: P Subramaniyan Pillay
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
28 February 2010
Case Number
18 of 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Lease Agreements, Rent Arrears, Ejectment
Source Language
English
Landlord and Tenant Civil Procedure Stay of Execution Lease Agreements Rent Arrears Ejectment

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nichol Chetty

Appellant

P Subramaniyan Pillay

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is a valid reason to grant a stay of execution of the decree confirming ejectment and arrears of rent
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has a valid lease agreement justifying stay

Ratio Decidendi

No valid reason was advanced for stay of execution; the applicant exhausted all avenues to resist the claim and must comply with the affirmed order.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • application for stay of execution dismissed
  • costs awarded to respondent