IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND JANUARY 2008 / 12TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 188 of 2008(V) ----------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN E.P. 1/2007 IN OS.96/2004 OF MUNSIFF-MAGISTRATE COURT,MANNARKAD. .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- C.M. RAMAKRISHNAN, S/O. KUTTIPPATHAN MOOTHAN,CHUNTHATH MELETHIL HOUSE, PALODE P.O., THACHANATTUKARA, MANNARKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH, ADV. SMT.PRIYA VIJAYAN. RESPONDENT: ---------------------- K. SUBRAMANIAN, S/O. APPU GUPTHAN, KUPPONDA HOUSE, P.T.M.A.L.P. SCHOOL, PALODE P.O., MANNARKKAD. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/01/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.C. NO. 188 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 2nd day of January, 2008. J U D G M E N T This writ petition is preferred against the order of the Munsiff-Magistrate, Mannarkkad in E.P.1/07. The question was regarding the executability of the decree. The contention raised was that the Court has no jurisdiction and therefore the execution petition is to be dismissed. Or in other words, the real contention was that the Court which passed the decree has no inherent jurisdiction to entertain the suit. Now, it is well settled principle that objections as to jurisdiction has to be taken at the earliest stage. Section 21 of CPC reads as follows: “No objection as to the place of suing shall be allowed by any Appellate or Revisional Court unless such objection was taken in the Court of first instance at the earliest possible opportunity and in all cases where issues are settled at or before such settlement, and unless there has been a consequent failure of justice.” W.P.C 188 OF 2008 -:2:- 2. Therefore it is very clear that a stage has been set in for raising the question of objection. After participating in the entire proceedings without objection as to the jurisdiction it is only futile on the executing stage to hold that the Court has no jurisdiction to try the case since it was not raised during the pendency of the suit. The Court below has properly considered the matter and held that the execution petition is maintainable. Therefore the writ petition lacks merit and it is dismissed. But it is made clear that if the judgment debtor has the earnest interest to wipe off the liability the Court below can give breathing time for payment of the same. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-