IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN TUESDAY, THE 15TH MARCH 2011 / 24TH PHALGUNA 1932 CRP.No. 352 of 2010() --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN EP 644/2008 IN OS.1054/2005 of ADDL. MUNSIFF COURT, IRINJALAKUDA .................... REVN. PETITIONER/3RD JUDGMENT DEBTOR/3RD DEFENDANT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ROBES, S/O.PARAPPULLY DEVASSY, KANJOOR DESOM, THORAV VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH CHAKYAT RESPONDENT/DECREE HOLDER/PLAINTIFF --------------------------------------------------------------- ANANDAPURAM KURIES (KERALA) PRIVATE LIMITED, ANANDAPURAM VILLAGE DESOM, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, CHAKKUNNY. BY ADV. SRI.N.AJITH BY ADV. SRI.R.SURAJ KUMAR THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: VK CRP.No. 352 of 2010() ------------------------------ ORDER ON IA 3136/2010 IN CRP NO.352/2010 DISMISSED 15.03.2011 Sd/- P.BHAVADASAN , JUDGE / TRUE COPY / P.A TO JUDGE VK P.BHAVADASAN, J. ---------------------------- C.R.P.No. 352 of 2010 --------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT Aggrieved by Ext.A3 order whereby warrant is directed to be issued, the petitioner has come up before this court. 2. The petitioner herein is the third defendant in O.S.No.1054/2005 and third judgment debtor in E.P.No.644/2008 on the file of the Additional Munsiff's Court, Irinjalakuda. The suit was one for realization of amount of Rs.58,000/- and interest at the rate of Rs.6%. The petitioner herein was one among the sureties for the transaction between the decree holder with the principle debtor. The petitioner is working as a Peon at Matha High School, Mannampatta. The petitioner submitted that he has no sufficient money to pay the decree amount. 3. The learned counsel for the respondent pointed out that it was admitted that the petitioner was employed in a school and drawing salary. The specific contention laid by the petitioner appears to be that after deductions from his salary, he gets only a meagre amount and he is unable to make payment in this proceeding. C.R.P.No. 352 of 2010 2 4. It is significant to notice that no evidence was adduced by either side. The contention of judgment debtor remains incontroverted. The lower court ought to have considered the contention of the petitioner. In the result, the C.R.P.is allowed. The Annexure 3 order in E.P.No.644/2008 in O.S.No.1054/2005 on the file of the Additional Munsiff's Court, Irinjalakuda is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Execution Court for fresh disposal in accordance with law and what has been stated above. P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE. ln