IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 7TH AUGUST 2009 / 16TH SRAVANA 1931 CRP.No. 438 of 2009() --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 28/07/2009 IN E.P.478/2007,EA736/08, IN OS.903/1995 of PRL.M.C.,ERNAKULAM .................... REVISION PETITIONER(S): JUDGMENT DEBTOR:RESPONDENT: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ABDUL RAHIMAN, AGED 68 YEARS, S/O.ABOOBACKER, 33/1420, THUNDIPARAMBIL, CHALIKKAVATTOM, VENNALA, KOCHI – 28. BY ADV. SRI.BABU CHERUKARA RESPONDENT(S): DECREE HOLDER:PETITIONER: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ASHRAF, S/O.ABDUL RAHIMAN, AGED 45 YEARS, VELLEPARAMBIL, RESIDING AT “SHARON”, KAVANATT, CHAKKARAPARAMBU, THAMMANAM P.O. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ORDER ON I.A.NO.2349/2009 IN C.R.P.NO.438/2009 DISMISSED 7/08/2009 SD/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C.R.P.No.438 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 7th August, 2009 ORDER The revision is filed by the judgment debtor challenging the order of the execution court for reconstruction of a demolished compound wall as provided by the decree under execution. If the compound wall is constructed as directed by the court, it would obstruct the right of way of the petitioner/judgment debtor is the case canvassed to impeach the propriety and correctness of the order of the executing court. If the judgment debtor has any tenable objection against the executability of the decree, then it should be canvassed before the execution court. The order impugned in the revision will show that the decree holder was permitted to construct the compound wall in execution of the decree, but it has been demolished. Under that circumstance, the execution court stating that the rule of law has to be upheld, passed the impugned order deputing the Amin with direction to reconstruct the demolished portion of the compound wall. Without adverting to the earlier order passed in execution of the decree, which is referred to in the impugned order the revision has been filed canvassing a case that the construction of CRP No.438/09 - 2 - the demolished wall will block right of way of the petitioner/judgment debtor. The revision lacks bonafides and it is dismissed. srd S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE