IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2011 / 24TH ASHADHA 1933 OP(C).No. 2291 of 2011(O) ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN EP 146/2010 IN OS.476/1959 of MUNSIFF COURT, PERAMBRA .................... PETITIONER(S): -------------------- PADMINI, AISWARYA LADIES TAILORING CENTRE, NEAR GOSALACKKAL, NEAR PERAMBRA BUS STAND, PERAMBRA, KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DIST. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHARAM.P RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KARTHAYANI AMMA, W/O.KALLOTH GOVINDAN NAIR, PUTHIYEDATH, CHENOLI AMSOM DESOM, KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE, PIN 673305. 2. PADMINI @ PADMAVATHY, D/O.KALLOTH GOVINDAN NAIR, KOOLIKKAVIL, KOOTHALI AMSOM DESOM, KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE, PIN 673 305. 3. SASI, S/O.GOVINDAN NAIR, PUTHIYEDATH, BANK CLERK, CHENOLI AMSOM, VALOOR DESOM, KOYILANDY TALUK, PIN 673 305. 4. LEELAVATHI D/O.GOVINDAN NAIR, KEEZHKANDIYIL, UNNIKULAM AMSOM, KANTHAPURAM DESOM, KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE, PIN 673305. THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP(C) NO.2291/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE E.P.NO.146/2010 ON THE FILES OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, PERAMBRA EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER STATEMENT DATED 14.03.2011 EXT.P3 & P4 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE AND BASIC TAX RECEIPT EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED ALONG WITH PETITION IN EA NO.18/2011 EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER TO THE EA NO.18/2011 EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT AND PLAN OF THE COMMISSIONER EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE EA NO.69/2011 //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- O.P.(C) No.2291 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of July, 2011. JUDGMENT Petitioner is a judgment debtor in E.P.No.146 of 2010 in O.S.No.476 of 1959 of the court of learned Munsiff, Perambra. That is a suit for partition in which a final decree was passed in the year 2003 and it has become final. That decree is being executed. Petitioner preferred objection to the execution petition on various grounds. Grievance of petitioner is that the executing court has rejected her objection by a cryptic order without taking into account grievance. Learned counsel submitted that though the final decree is in respect of 80.30 cents, the Advocate Commissioner appointed in the final decree proceeding has reported the extent as 170.11 cents. Prayer in this petition is to direct the executing court to issue a copy of the order dated 11.07.2011 in E.P.No.146 of 2010. Learned counsel contended that until the impugned order is challenged before the appropriate forum, delivery of property may be stayed. 2. Having heard learned counsel I am not inclined to grant the stay prayed for. This is a suit of the year 1959 and still the fruits of the decree could not be enjoyed by the persons who obtained the decree. Final decree itself was passed in the year 2003. At this stage this Court does not consider it appropriate or just to interfere with the execution proceeding. But, I make it clear O.P(C) No.2291 of 2011 2 that execution and delivery if any effected will be subject to the result of the challenge that petitioner might make to the order dated 11.07.2011 before the appropriate forum. The executing court is directed to issue a copy of the said order if applied for on usual terms. Resultantly this Original Petition is disposed of in the following lines: i. Learned Munsiff, Perambra is directed to issue copy of order dated 11.07.2011 in E.P.No.146 of 2010 in O.S.No.476 of 1959 (if applied for) on usual terms as early as possible at any rate, within a week from the date a copy of this judgment is produced before learned Munsiff. ii. It is directed that execution and delivery if any effected will be subject to the result of the challenge that petitioner might make to order dated 11.07.2011. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks