IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS MONDAY, THE 14TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 25TH MAGHA 1932 Mat.Appeal.No. 293 of 2006() ---------------------------- EP.14/2005 of FAMILY COURT, KOTTAYAM .................... PETITIONERS: APPELLANTS ------------------------- 1. SAJI C.GOPAL, AGED 38, S/O.GOPALAN, CHELLIMALAYIL HOUSE, MEDUMKUNNAM, P.O.CHENGANASSERY. 2. SAROJINI, AGED 62, W/O.GOPALAN, DO. DO. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.MADHUSOODANAN SRI.T.V.JAYAKUMAR NAMBOODIRI RESPONDENTS: PLAINTIFFS/DECREE HOLDERS ---------------------------------------- 1. BABITHA RANI, D/O.PONNAMMA, MANGALATHU VEETTIL, POONNALA P.O., WARD NO.V, POONNALA VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM. 2. NITHY ROJAS (MINOR), DO. DO. ADV. SMT.K.T.LILLY @ LILLY JAMES FOR R1 & 2 SMT.ROSY GEORGE FOR R1 & 2 THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M. JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS JJ., - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mat. Appeal No. 293 of 2006 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 14th day of February 2011 JUDGMENT Joseph J., The appellants are the respondents in O.S. No. 239 of 2001 filed by the respondents before the Family Court, Kollam for realisation of certain moveable and for maintenance. The respondents preferred execution petition which was transferred to the Family Court, Kottayam for arrest and detention of the petitioners. The first appellant appeared and pleaded no means. It is the appellants' case that without following the procedure under Order XX1 Rule 37, the Court below passed the impugned order directing the judgment debtor to be arrested and detained in civil prison for realisation of the decreed amount. This appeal is filed against that impugned order. Mat. Appeal No. 293 of 2006 :2: 2. Learned counsel for the appellants reported no instructions. We heard the learned counsel for the respondents. This Court, by interim order granted stay on condition that the appellant pays Rs.21,000/- within one week and another Rs.21,000/- within another one week and Rs.42,000/- within one month thereafter. Learned counsel for the respondents points out that no amount has been paid. The order shows that it has come out in evidence that the judgment debtor is a B.Tech Engineer and he was conducting a computer institution. It is also found that the judgment debtor belongs to a family having financial capacity and he can easily raise the amount to pay the decree amount. It is pointed that the Family Court, had transferred the E.P. to the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram. 3. The report of the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram is extracted below: “The Sheristadar, after verification, informed that E.P. No. 49 of 2009 was posted on 27.12.2010, on which date the petitioner was absent. Warrant issued against respondent returned unexecuted. Mat. Appeal No. 293 of 2006 :3: The E.P. was posted for further steps to 2.2.2011. There was no sitting on 2.2.2011 as the Family Court was holding Camp sitting. The case now stands adjourned to 14.3.2011.” 4. We see no reason to interfere with the order and dismiss the Mat. Appeal. K.M. JOSEPH, (JUDGE) M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, (JUDGE) dl/