IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2008 / 13TH JYAISHTA 1930 FAO.No. 263 of 2007() --------------------- EA.650/05 IN EP.13/03 IN OS.128/2000 OF THE PRL.SUB COURT,IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER -------------------- JOSSY THOMAS, W/O.VALIYAVEETTIL THOMAS, KARUVILASSERY VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.JOMY GEORGE RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS ----------------------- 1. MANUVAL SONS FINANCE ENTERPRISES, THRISSUR. 2. THANKAPPAN, S/O.ERATAMAKYAL KUTTY, 'THAPASYA' PRASANTH NAGAR, NO.812 ULLOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 3. V.C.BALACHANDRAN, S/O.VELIYATHU CHANDRASEKHARAN, KOORKANCHERY VILLAGE, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.SANTHOSH (PODUVAL) FOR R1 SMT.R.RAJITHA FOR R1 THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON I.A.NO.3301/2007 IN F.A.O.NO.263/2007 --------- Dismissed Sd/-P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE. 3/6/2008 Sd/- T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. P.R.RAMAN & T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,JJ. ------------------------------- F.A.O.NO.263 OF 2007 -------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2008 JUDGMENT Raman, J. Appellant is the petitioner in E.A.No.650/2005 in E.P.13/2003 in O.S.No.128/2000 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Irinjalakuda. The property in question was sold in public auction in execution of the decree in O.S.No.128/2000. The judgment debtor has not filed any objection. On the other hand, the appellant herein raised a contention that the decree schedule property is lying contiguous to his property without any demarcation boundary and therefore, the sale is bad. He also contended that there is no proper publication. Except the ipse dixit of the party concerned, no document of title thereto or any other evidence was produced. So long as the property in question is concerned, admittedly, it belongs to the judgment debtor to which no claim is raised even by the objector herein. His contention is that his property is lying with the judgment debtor's property without any demarcation boundary. Before taking delivery of the property necessarily the land will have to be demarcated but that stage has not -2- F.A.O.No.263./2007 reached and therefor there is no substance in the contention now raised. For the reasons stated by the court below with which we agree, the sale cannot be set aside. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. P.R.RAMAN, Judge. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, Judge. kcv.