IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 15TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 24TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 23742 of 2010(O) -------------------------- OS.44/2003 of MUNSIFF COURT, KODUNGALLUR .................... PETITIONER: --------------- CHANDRAN, S/O.AYYAPPAN, NAMBIYANDHRA HOUSE, SREENARAYANAPURAM VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. SANTHA, W/O.CHANDRAN, NAMBIYANDHRA HOUSE, SREENARAYANAPURAM VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK-680 671. 2. INDIAN BANK, KODUNGALLUR BRANCH, KODUNGALLUR-680 664. ADV. SRI.S.EASWARAN FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 23742 of 2010(O) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 : Plaint, O.S.44/03 before the Munsiff Court, Kodungallur dated nil. EXHIBIT P2 : Execution petition, E.P.No.792/07 in O.S.44/03 before the Munsiff Court, Kodungallur, dated 18/8/07. EXHIBIT P3 : Application, E.A.510/07 in O.S.44/03 in E.P.No.792/07 in E.A.395/07 before the Munsiff Court, Kodungallur dtd.03/12/09. EXHIBIT P4 : Order dtd.21/6/2010 in E.A.No.900/09 in E.P.No.792/07 before the Munsiff Court, Kodungallur. EXHIBIT P5 : Application, E.A.No.395/07 in E.P.792/07 in O.S.44/03 before the Munsiff Court, Kodungallur dtd.6/10/2007. EXHIBIT P6 : Order in E.A.510/07 E.P.792/07 in E.A.395/07 before the Munsiff Court, Kodungallur dtd.30/6/2010. EXHIBIT P7 : Medical Certificate dtd.01/10/07. THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.23742 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this 15th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT This petition is filed by the husband of judgment debtor in E.P.No.792 of 2007 in O.S.No.44 of 2003 of the court of learned Munsiff, Kodungallur. Respondent No.2 has obtained a decree for payment of money against respondent No.1 and filed E.P.No.792 of 2007 for realisation of the amount. Petitioner, husband of respondent No.1 contends that respondent No.1 was not having sound mental condition and was undergoing treatment under a Psychiatrist. Hence petitioner filed Ext.P3, application to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to ascertain her health condition. That application was dismissed by Ext.P4, order. Then came Ext.P5, application to appoint petitioner as guardian of respondent No.1 which was dismissed vide Ext.P6, order. Thus, Exts.P4 and P6, orders are under challenge. Learned counsel contended that Exts.P4 and P6, orders are not correct. I have heard counsel for respondent No.1 as well. 2. In Ext.P3, application, petitioner claimed that respondent No.1 is mentally ill and disabled but, it is not disputed that respondent No.1 had filed written statement on her own on W.P(C).No.23742 of 2010 : 2 : the trial side (in O.S.No.44 of 2003). On going through Exts.P4 and P6, orders I do not find reason to interfere with the said orders. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner, husband of respondent No.1 states that if some concession is given by respondent No.2, they are prepared to pay the entire amount and settle the matter. I permit respondent No.1 to raise that question in the executing court. If any such request is made in the executing court, executing court shall hear counsel for respondents and ascertain whether respondent No.2 is able to give any concession to respondent No.1 in the matter of amount payable under the decree and whether respondent No.2 could give installment facility to respondent No.1 for payment of the amount. This petition is closed with the above directions. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-