IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2009 / 24TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 19960 of 2009(O) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN EP 19/2007 IN OS.8/2004 of SUB COURT, MAVELIKKARA .................... PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- 1. MURALEEDHARAN NAIR,S/O.NARAYANAN NAIR, AGED 56,LAKSHMI NIVAS,PATHIYOOR KIZHAKKEMURI, PATTIYOOR VILLAGE. 2. AMBIKAMMA,W/O.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR, AGED 51, -DO- -DO- BY ADV. MR.K.R.SUNIL RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- SARAMMA KOSHI,W/O.KOSHI,AGED 62, KOCHALUMMOOTTIL,PATHIYOOR KIZHAKEMURI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 19960 OF 2009 O ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 15th day of July, 2009 J U D G M E N T The writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:- “(i) Call for the records pertaining to EP.No.19/07 in OS.No.8/04 of the Sub Court, Mavelikkara and to quash Ext.P1. (ii) Direct the Sub Court Mavelikkara to keep the execution proceedings i EP.No.19/07 in abeyance till the final orders in Exts.P3 and P4.” 2. Petitioners are the judgment debtors in E.P.No.19/07 in OS.No.8/04 on the file of the Sub Court, Mavelikkara. The above suit was one for specific performance, which was decreed exparte. Respondent is the plaintiff/ decree holder. The judgment debtors have moved an application for setting aside the exparte decree with a petition to condone delay for a period of 1876 days and it is pending enquiry, is canvassed for invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this court to stay the execution proceedings taken by the decree holder to execute the decree. Perusing the WPC.19960/09 : 2 : order passed by the execution court dated 23.6.2009, copy of which is produced as Ext.P1 in the writ petition, it is seen that the petitioners/ judgment debtors had moved an application before the execution court seeking the very same relief, but, it was found meritless and dismissed. The order passed by the learned Sub Judge would show that on a previous occasion the petitioner had moved a writ petition before this court pursuant to steps taken when a bank proceeded against him for realising the debt due from him. It is further disclosed by the order that the decree holder had paid the entire sum of Rs.5,65,535/- due to the bank, which was due from the judgment debtors. More interestingly the order reveals that the petitioner before filing the application for setting aside the exparte decree, had knowledge of that decree and was contesting the proceedings in the execution by filing one petition or another and lastly moving a writ petition before this court also. The writ petition is devoid of any merit, and it is dismissed. Sd/- (S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE) aks