IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 10TH AUGUST 2009 / 19TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 19121 of 2009(O) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 18/11/2008 IN EP. 1610 /2004 IN OS.3473/2003 of II ADDL.MUNSIFF COURT,THRISSUR .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- P.A.GEORGE, AGED 69, S/O.PALLISSERY ANTHONY, PARALAM VILLAGE, AMMADAM DESOM, THRISSUR TALUK. BY ADVS.MR.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR), MR.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH) RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- POORAM KURIES AND LONAS (P) LTD., RICE BAZAR, THRISSUR. BY ADV. MR.JIJO PAUL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.19121/2009 O APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE PROOF AFFIDAVIT FILED ON BEHALF OF THE DECREE HOLDER IN E.P.NO.1610/04 IN O.S.NO.3473/03 DTD. 4/3/08 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, THRISSUR. P2: COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN E.P.NO.1610/04 IN O.S.NO.3473/03 DTD. 1/04/08 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, THRISSUR. P3: COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER DTD. 27/10/05. P4: COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED 2ND ADDL. MUNSIFF COURT, THRISSUR IN E.P.NO.1610/04 IN O.S.NO.3473/03 DTD. 18/11/08. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.19121 of 2009 - O --------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of August, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the first judgment debtor in E.P.No.1610 of 2004 in O.S.No.3473 of 2003 on the file of the II Additional Munsiff Court, Thrissur. Decree executed was one passed for money. Resisting execution, the first judgment debtor contended that he has no means. After enquiry his plea was negatived vide P4 order. Impeaching the propriety and correctness of that order this writ petition has been filed invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. I heard the counsel on both sides. 3. While admitting the petition and granting interim stay of operation of P4 order, petitioner was directed to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards part of the decree debt due. That has not been complied with. Perusing P4 order I find that in the enquiry by the court against the first judgment debtor, it was found that he is in possession and enjoyment of 15½ cents of property. His W.P.(C).No.19121 of 2009 - O 2 plea of no means was found to be meritless by the court below. I find no reason to take a different view. Writ petition is dismissed. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. bkn/-