IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID FRIDAY, THE 2ND JANUARY 2009 / 12TH POUSHA 1930 CRP.No. 955 of 2006() --------------------- E.P.NO.245/2005 IN OS.912/2001 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,THRISSUR .................... REVN. PETITIONERS/JUDGMENT DEBTORS -------------------------------------- 1. REJI, D/O. IRIMBAN ANTONY, MUKKATTUKARA DESOM, NETTISSERY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. E.D.ANTONY, S/O. IRIMBAN DEVASSY, MUKKATTUKARA DESOM, NETTISSERY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. ELSY, W/O. ANTONY, MUKKATTUKARA DESOM, NETTISSERY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.BABU SMT.N.SUDHA RESPONDENT/ PETITIONER/DECREE HOLDER ---------------------------------------- A.O.ANTO, S/O. ARAKKAL VEETTIL OUSEPH, PUZHAKKAL VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON IA.NO.3400/2006 IN CRP.NO.955/2006 ---------- Dismissed 2/1/2009 Sd/- HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE. HARUN-UL-RASHID,J. --------------------------- C.R.P.NO.955 OF 2006 ---------------------------- DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2009 O R D E R The Judgment debtors challenged the order in E.P.245/05 in O.S.No.912/01. Execution Petition was filed for realisation of the decree amount of Rs.3,48,653/- by arrest and detention of the judgment debtors 1 and 2 and by attachment of the movable properties of the 3rd judgment debtor. The decree holder was examined as PW-1. He gave evidence before the court below that judgment debtors are getting income from their business and also from their rented properties and that they are wilfully and deliberately avoiding payment of decree amount. The judgment debtors did not adduce any evidence. The court below entered the finding that the decree holder has established that the respondents are getting sufficient income and they are wilfully not paying the decree amount. The finding of the court below based on the oral -2- CRP.No.955/2006 evidence of the decree holder stands unchallenged. There is no justification for the counsel for the revision petitioners to ask for an opportunity in a case where the judgment debtors did not choose to avail an opportunity at the appropriate time. Execution Petition was filed during October, 2005 and the same was disposed of about one year later. I find that there is no bona fides to ask for further time to adduce evidence. The findings entered into by the court below being on evidence, I am unable to take a different view. In the result, C.R.P. fails and accordingly the same is dismissed. The learned counsel for the revision petitioners submitted that the judgment debtors may be permitted to pay the decree amount in instalments. Taking a lenient view, the revision petitioners are given opportunity to pay the decree amount in instalments, if they pay Rs.1.5 lakhs within one month from today and the balance amount in ten equal monthly instalments commencing from the month of February, 2009 without default. -3- CRP.No.955/2006 The order of arrest and detention shall be kept in abeyance for the purpose of making payments. If the revision petitioners fail to pay the first instalment within the said period or if two consecutive instalments are defaulted, the order under challenge shall stand revived. Learned counsel for the revision petitioners also submitted that there is calculation mistake in fixing the amount due. She further submitted that her clients are ready to submit a statement showing the correct amount due. In the circumstances, I direct the execution court to call for the statements from both sides and fix the decree amount liable to be remitted by the judgment debtors. It shall be done within a period of three weeks from today. Transmit the records immediately. HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge. kcv.