IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 17TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 26TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 30668 of 2008(A) -------------------------------------------- EP.132/2007 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, PALAKKAD .................... PETITIONER: R.MURALIDHARAN, S/O.N.RAMAKRISHNAN, AGED 45 YEARS, PADINJAREKKAD, PATTANCHERY, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN RESPONDENT: THATHAMANGALAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., NO.P 502, THATHAMANGALAM, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.P. Balachandran, J. -------------------------- W.P.(C)No.30668 of 2008 A -------------------------- JUDGMENT Petitioner, who is the judgment debtor in E.P. No.132/07 pending on the file of the Sub Court, Palakkad, has sought to get set aside the order dated 18.9.2008 in the said EP. Order dated 18.9.2008 reads thus: “Today no payment. Repeat arrest warrant to the respondent.” From the above order, it can be understood that warrant had been issued earlier and some payments were made and it is for reason of not making any payment on subsequent posting date that arrest warrant was ordered to be repeated. 2. It is contended before me by the learned counsel for the petitioner that even while ordering warrant in the first instance, there was no order passed by the execution court pursuant to the WPC 30668/08 2 objection of the petitioner regarding no means. According to him, no order issuing warrant could have been passed without an order entering a finding in favour of the petitioner/judgment debtor regarding his means. The records produced along with this writ petition show that on 11.8.2006, the petitioner has deposited Rs.80,000/- in Thathamangalam Service Co-operative Bank, which is the decree holder bank; that thereafter on 3.9.2008, just after three weeks, he has made a deposit of another Rs.24,000/- and that on the very next day, namely on 4.9.2008, he made two deposits respectively of Rs.20,000/- and Rs.10,000/- and those are evidenced by Exhibit P4 series photostat copies of receipts. These itself would show that he is one who is having means. If at all there is any serious contention raised by the petitioner that at present he has no means, viz., after 4.9.2008 or even earlier to those deposits, he should have stated the reasons as to why Exhibit P4 series do WPC 30668/08 3 not evidence his financial affluence and why he contends that he is having no means to discharge the balance debt. If at all the petitioner files objection before the execution court explaining all these, the court may enter a finding as regards his means before issuing warrant. Till such an objection is filed, petitioner is not entitled to any relief. If such a detailed objection is filed and that appears to have any merit on the application of the petitioner, the execution court may withdraw the warrant and conduct an enquiry into the plea of “no means” and pass appropriate orders. Till then, warrant cannot be kept in abeyance or the impugned order cannot be set aside. The writ petition is disposed of as above. 17th November, 2008 (K.P.Balachandran, Judge) tkv