IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI FRIDAY, THE 13TH MAY 2011 / 23RD VAISAKHA 1933 OP(C).No. 1587 of 2011(O) ------------------------- OS.56/2007 of SUB COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA .................... PETITIONER (S): -------------------- ANNAMMA JACOB, AGED 60 YEARS, D/O. GEEVARGHESE PHILIPOSE, KALARICKAL HOUSE, CHERUKOL.P.O, RANY, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.P.PRADEEP SRI.S.SREEDEV RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THOMAS KOSHY, S/O. KOSHY, ODAMVELIL HOUSE, NARANGANAM WEST.P.O, KOZHENCHERY, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.ARUN.B.VARGHESE FOR R THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.Q.BARKATH ALI, J. ------------------------ O.P.(C).No.1587 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 13th day of May, 2011 JUDGMENT This is a petition filed by the daughter and sole legal heir of the deceased defendant in O.S. No.56/2007 of Sub Court, Pathanamthitta under Article 227 of the Constitution seeking permission to deposit Rs. 7,80,000/- being the decree debt in the suit and to lift the attachment over the plaint schedule property. 2. The respondent filed O.S. No.56/2007 before the Sub Court, Pathanamthitta against the father of the petitioner for realisation of money due from him. The consent decree was passed on 10th October 2007, a copy of which is produced as Ext.P2. The decree in the suit was for recovery of Rs.6,54,000/- from the defendant with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of the suit till realisation with costs. After the decree, the defendant died. The petitioner is the sole legal heir and daughter of the deceased defendant. 3. It is alleged in the petition that the petitioner came to Crl.M.C.NO. 1337/2011 -2- know that the respondent/decree holder has filed an Execution Petition before the Sub Court for realisation of the amount and that there is an attachment before the judgment in respect of this property. In this petition, the petitioner has prayed that she may be permitted to deposit the entire decree amount, which according to her is Rs.7,80,000/-, and the attachment over the plaint schedule property may be lifted. 4. The respondent/decree holder has entered appearance. He submitted that he has no objection for lifting the attachment if the entire decree amount is paid by the petitioner which according to him will come to more than Rs.7,80,000/-. 5. Heard both parties. As the respondent has no objection in allowing the original petition, this petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to deposit Rs.7,80,000/- before the Lower Court towards the decree debt within one week from this date. The respondent is permitted to withdraw the same. The Lower Court is directed to lift the attachment over the plaint schedule property. The Lower Court shall decide the balance amount due to the decree holder within one month from this date. The petitioner shall file an affidavit before the Lower Court Crl.M.C.NO. 1337/2011 -3- undertaking to pay balance amount if any due to the respondent as and when the Lower Court quantifies the same. The Original Petition is allowed as found above. P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE. dpk