IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN TUESDAY, THE 30TH MARCH 2010 / 9TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 10985 of 2010(O) -------------------------- OS.238/1994 of SUB COURT, TIRUR .................... PETITIONER: --------------- CHERIYA BEEVI @ SARAKUTTY, D/O. CHERIYA BAVA, PONNANI NAGARAM AMSOM DESOM, PONNANI TALUK, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.JAMSHEED HAFIZ RESPONDENT: --------------- KRISHNADAS, S/O. KANHIRAPARAMBIL SIVARAMAN, PORAKKALENGAD DESOM, KANIPAYOOR VILLAGE, THALAPPILLY TALUK, MALAPPURAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.BHAVADASAN, J. ------------------------- W.P (C) No.10985 of 2010 -------------------------- Dated this the 30th March, 2010 J U D G M E N T Limited prayer in this writ petition is for a direction to the Execution Court to consider Ext.P2 before any orders are passed on Ext.P1. 2. Petitioner is the respondent in E.PNo.127/07 before the Sub Court, Tirur. E.P. is for realisation of money due from the petitioner and her property. The property is brought to sale. It is pointed out that suit was decreed and the decree was for a direction to the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.90,000/- to the respondent. The amount was not paid and execution proceedings were taken out. It is pointed out that respondent did not receive any notice in the execution petition. He received only the notice of settlement proclamation of sale. Petitioner is an agricultural labour and is living in the house constructed in the same property. Petitioner claims that she is liable to be exempted under Section 60 ( c) of the Code of Civil Procedure. Petitioner claims to have filed a detailed objection to the Draft Sale Proclamation. She has raised all the contentions therein. Copy of the objection is produced as Ext.P2. Petitioner says W.P (C) No.10985 of 2010 2 that her objection will not be considered at all and that the proclamation may be settled taking into consideration her objection. 2. The prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to the court below to consider the settlement of proclamation of sale. In the light of the order that is proposed to be passed notice to the respondent is not necessary. 3. Petitioner has pointed out that she has filed Ext.P2 objection to the notice of sale obtained by her. What is apprehended is that the objection filed by the petitioner may not be considered by the court below and that the proclamation of sale may be settled without taking into consideration her objection. There is no reason to think so. However, there will be a direction to the court below to consider Ext.P2 objection while settling the proclamation of sale if not already settled. The writ petition is disposed of, as above. P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE ma W.P (C) No.10985 of 2010 3 W.P (C) No.10985 of 2010 4 W.P (C) No.10985 of 2010 5