IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST AUGUST 2011 / 9TH BHADRA 1933 OP(C).No. 2868 of 2011(O) ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN EP 4/07 IN OS.39/1989 of ADDL. DISTRICT COURT-II, MAVELIKKARA .................... PETITIONERS -------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PROJECT CIRCLE, PIRAVOM, (FORMERLY PUMBA IRRIGATION CIRCLE, CHENGANNUR). 2. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PROJECT CIRCLE, PIRAVOM, (FORMERLY PUMBA IRRIGATION CIRCLE, CHENGANNUR). BY SRI. T.K. SAJEEV, GOVERNMENT PLEADER. RESPONDENT: --------------------- A.SAIULABDEEN, S/O.HYDROSEKUNJU, RESIDING AT AMMANIYAN, KILIKOLLOOR, QUILON-691004. BY THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: O.P (C) No.2868/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1 – TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE DECREE DATED 25-03-1995 IN OS NO.39/89 OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, MAVELIKKARA EXT.P2 – TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 28-01-1998. EXT.P3 – TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO DATED 21-02-1998. EXT.P4 – TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN AS NO.40/97. EXT.P5 – TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPLICATION. EXT.P6 – TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15-06-2011 IN W.P NO.04/07 IN O.S NO.30/89 OF THE DISTRICT COURT, MAVELIKKARA. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS NIL TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE AMG THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- O.P.(C) No.2868 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of August, 2011. JUDGMENT This Original Petition is in challenge of Ext.P6, order passed by learned Additional District Judge-II, Mavelikkara on June 15, 2011 fixing the balance amount payable by the petitioners and directing petitioners to deposit such amount within 30 days from the date of order with interest. 2. Learned Government Pleader submitted that in the statement filed by petitioners it was pointed out that the sum of `2,67,964/- was deposited in the executing court on 18.02.1998 and hence liability of petitioners to pay interest ceased on deposit of the said amount. Learned Government Pleader submits that the deposit was made pursuant to Ext.P2, order dated January 28, 1998. 3. Ext.P2, order shows that this Court while entertaining A.S.No.40 of 1997 from the judgment and decree in O.S.No.39 of 1989 of the court of learned Additional District Judge-II, Mavelikkara (which is being executed) directed as a condition for stay as prayed for in C.M.P.No.637 of 1998 that petitioners shall furnish security within a period of six weeks from the date of Ext.P2, order. In otherwords, it was pursuant to the said order that the amount above mentioned was deposited by petitioner in the executing court. That was only as a security for stay requested for and granted in favour of petitioners. Such deposit cannot arrest running of interest so far as the decree holder is concerned. Useful reference can be made to the decisions in P.S.L.Ramanathan Chettiar OP(C) No.2868/2011 2 and others v. O.R.M.P.R.M. Ramanathan Chettiar(AIR 1968 SC 1047) and Sales and Agencies v. Plantation Corporation of Kerala (1996 (1) KLT 509) also. In both the cases, deposit was made as security on condition that the decree holder could withdraw the amount on furnishing security. It was held in the said decisions that it was not a money due to the decree holder, it only enabled him to withdraw the amount on furnishing security which meant that he was liable to refund the amount and hence interest on the amount would not cease to run. In the present case, Ext.P2, order does not even enable the decree holder to withdraw the amount even on furnishing of security but only directed that petitioners shall furnish security within a period of six weeks from the date of Ext.P2, order. The deposit as aforesaid made in the executing court cannot arrest running of interest. Petitioners cannot contend that from the date of deposit, interest must cease to run. 4. There is no challenge to the impugned order on any other ground. 5. I do not find reason to interfere. Original Petition is dismissed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks