IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 5TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 14TH BHADRA 1933 OP(C).NO. 2839 OF 2011(O) --------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN EP 91/2010 IN OS.94/2005 OF MUNSIFF COURT, VADAKARA PETITIONER: ------------------ 1. SRI.SASIKUMAR.K.K,S/O.KANNAN, AGED 49,EARLIER WORKING US CLERK,POZHUTHANA GRAMA PANCHAYATH,WAYANAD DISTRICT,NOW WORKING AS UD CLERK,ONCHIYAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH P.O.,NUT STREET, VATAKARA TALUK,KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. SRI.N.ABOOBACKER,S/O.UMMER,AGED 52 YRS TEACHER, PURMKARA M.J.B.SCHOOL,PUDUPPANAM AMSOM DESOM, VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DIST BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- CANARA BANK WITH HEAD OFFICE AT BANGALORE,BY PRINCIPAL OFFICER,SENIOR MANAGER CANARA BANK, AMBIKA BUILDING,CHURCH ROAD, VATAKARA AMSOM DEOSM, VATAKARA TALUK. ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.P.GOPINATH SRI.S.RAMU THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: O.P(C) NO.2839 OF 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION NO.91 OF 2010 IN O.S. NO.94 OF 2005 PENDING BEFORE THE MUNSIFF'S COURT. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE E.A. NO.204 OF 2011 FILED BEFORE THE EXECUTION COURT. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== O.P(C) No.2839 of 2011 ==================================== Dated this the 05th day of September, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioners-judgment debtors challenge the order issuing warrant of arrest to the second petitioner on a finding that in spite of having sufficient means he has not paid the amount due under the decree. A copy of the order is not produced but relevant portions of the order are extracted in paragraph 5 of the Original Petition. 2. Though there is challenge to the finding regarding means, I do not find reason to interfere with the order since it is not disputed that second petitioner is working as a teacher. 3. Learned counsel requested that second petitioner may be permitted to pay the amount in installments. I have heard learned counsel for respondent also. Learned counsel submitted that in case installment facility is granted, it may be confined to a limited period. Having heard counsel on both sides I am inclined to permit the second petitioner (against whom alone warrant of arrest is issued and which is under challenge in this proceeding) to pay the amount due under the decree in eight equal monthly installments beginning from 01.10.2011. O.P(C) No.2839 of 2011 -: 2 :- This Original Petition is disposed of in the following lines: (a) Second petitioner is directed to pay/deposit in the executing court for payment to the respondent the amount due under the decree in eight equal monthly installments beginning from 01.10.2.011 provided that by the last installment the entire amount due is paid. (b) Payment/deposit shall be made on or before the 5th of every month and in case that day happens to be a holiday, such payment/deposit shall be made on the next working day. (c) In case any of the above conditions is violated it is open to the executing court to proceed with the execution proceedings on the strength of the finding regarding means without any further enquiry. O.P(C) No.2839 of 2011 -: 3 :- (d) Warrant of arrest issued against second petitioner will stand in abeyance during the said period of eight months beginning from 01.10.2011 or till default is committed whichever is earlier. This order will not stand in the way of respondent proceeding against the first petitioner as provided under law. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv