IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 10TH JANUARY 2008 / 20TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 1316 of 2008(F) ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 7/11/07 IN EP 93/07 IN ARC.446/2004 of MUNSIFF COURT, QUILANDY .................... PETITIONER: ------------ KUZHIKKANDATHIL KARUNAKARA KURUP S/O. CHANDUKUTTIKURUP, BALLUSSERY AMSOM, PUTHOORVATTOM DESOM ,KOYILANDY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHARAM.P RESPONDENT: --------------- THE SECRETARY,REGIONAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK BALUSSERY, BALUSSERY AMSOM DESOM KOYILANDY TALUK. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- W.P.(C). NO. 1316 OF 2008 --------------------- Dated this the 10th day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT This writ petition is preferred against the order of the Munsiff, Koyilandy in EP 93/07 in ARC 446/04. In execution of the decree, the court below found that the 2nd respondent therein is having sufficient means and therefore ordered arrest. It is aggrieved by that decision, the present writ petition is preferred. 2. Though strictly only a civil revision petition is maintainable, I am not dismissing the case on technical grounds for the reason that what has to be attained is a substantial justice. I make it clear that this shall not be cited as a precedent in any other case. 3. The court below found that the respondent did not enter the box and gave evidence. The court also found that he has not proved about his ailment. One cannot find fault with the court in arriving at a decision for the reason that the respondent did not mount the box or attempted to produce the document. But it shall not be taken a ground to put him in civil prison, if he is otherwise entitled to the benefit. He has also filed an additional counter contending that he has moved an application before the Debt Relief Commission. The learned counsel had taken me through the relevant provisions namely Farmers Debt Relief Commission (Act 1 of WPC NO 1316/08 2 2007), which confers benefits on certain type of farmers, agricultural labourers etc. The court below did not entertain the additional counter filed. I feel, when the Government wants to confer any benefit on a farmer, the court shall not be too technical to consider that plea. Therefore, the order under challenge is set aside, permitting the petitioner herein to adduce both documentary and oral evidence in support of his respective contention and the court below is directed to receive the additional counter affidavit and permit the decree holder to file any replication or rejoinder, as the case may be, consider the matter afresh and then dispose of the same in accordance with law. Since I am disposing the case at the admission stage itself, on appearance of the writ petitioner the court below shall give notice to the counsel for the decree holder, fix up a date for appearance for hearing and then dispose of the same in accordance with law. Since I have set aside the order, a warrant of arrest shall not be executed until fresh orders are passed, after considering the matter afresh. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps WPC NO 1316/08 3