IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 12TH OCTOBER 2009 / 20TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 10450 of 2008(R) -------------------------- EA.799/06 IN EP.88/05 IN OS.252/2003 of II ADDL.M.C.,NEYYATTINKARA .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- SOBHANA.S., SANDHYABHAVAN, MANALOOR, NEYYATTINKARA P.O., TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.R.GOPAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- SHINE BOS, PARAVILA VEEDU, KULATHAMAL, KATTAKADA P.O., TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA FOR R1 SRI.M.AJAY (IRUMPANAM) FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No. 10450/08 APPPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- P1: True copy of the judgment dated 9-1-2004 in O.S.No.252/2003 of the II Addl. Munsiff Court, Neyyattinkara. P2: True photocopy of the E.P.No.88/2005 in O.S.No.252/2003 of the II Addl. Munsiff Court, Neyyattinkara, dated 23-2-2005. P3: True photocopy of the order dated 29-9-2006 in E.P.No.88/2005 in O.S.No.252/2003 of the II Addl. Munsiff Court, Neyyattinkara. P4: True photocopy of the order dated 20-12-2006 in C.R.P.No.854/2006 of this Honourable Court. P5: True photocopy of the E.A.No.799/2006 dated 3-11-2006 of the II Addl. Munsiff's Court, Neyyattinkara. P6: True photocopy of the identity card of the petitioner of Kerala Agrl. Welfare Fund Board. P7: True photocpy of the certificate from the Village Officer, Neyyattinkara dated 21-3-2007. P8: True typed copy of the deposition of the petitioner. P9: True photocpy of the valuation certificate dated 1-9-2006 of the Tahsildar, Neyyattinkara. P10: True photocopy of the order dated 16-11-2007 in E.A.No.799/2006 in E.P. No.88/2005 in O.S.No.252/2003 of the II Addl. Munsiff Court, Neyyattinkara. P11: True photocopy of notice dated 23-2-2008 issued by the Munsiff Court. P12: Photocopy of the report of the Amin dated 10-3-2008. P.Q. BARKATH ALI, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P.(C) No. 10450 of 2008 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 12th day of October, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the defendant in O.S.No.252 of 2003 on the file of the Second Additional Munsiff's Court, Neyyattinkara. She challenges Ext.P10 order dated November 16, 2007 of the Munsiff in E.A.No.799 of 2006 in E.P. No.88 of 2005 in the above suit. 2. The respondent filed the suit for recovery of Rs.70,000/- from the petitioner/defendant on the basis of an agreement. The learned Munsiff decreed the suit. Ext.P1 is the copy of the judgment dated January 9, 2004. On February 23, 2005 the respondent/plaintiff filed E.P. No.88 of 2005 for realisation of the decree amount by selling the property of the petitioner which consists of 10.5 cents in Sy. No.284 of 2004 of Neyyattinkara Village with the residential building therein. The petitioner filed objection contenting that he is a domestic servant and hence the building within the attached property should be exempted and the valuation shown in the sale sale proclamation is too low. The learned Munsiff allowed the E.P. by order dated 29-9-2006. Ext.P3 is the copy of that order. Challenging the said order the petitioner filed C.R.P. No.854 of 2006 before this Court and this Court by order dated December 20, 2006 permitted the petitioner to raise WPC 10450/08 2 all her contentions in E.A.No.799 of 2006 which was filed by the revision petitioner before the Munsiff's Court during the pendency of the C.R.P. This Court also directed her to deposit Rs.10,000/- before the Executing Court. Ext.P4 is the order of this Court in the above C.R.P. The petitioner did not deposit that amount. By Ext.P10 order dated November 16, 20007 the learned Munsiff dismissed the E.A.. Et.P11 is the copy of the notice issued by the learned Munsiff under Order XXI Rule 66 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Ext.P12 is the report of the Ajmin dated March 10, 2008 in which it is stated that the property has been sold to the decree holder/plaintiff. The petitioner challenges orders Exts.P3, P10 and P11. 3. Heard the submission of counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the respondent. 4. On going through the order Ext.P10, I find no grave error or illegality. Admittedly, E.A.No.799 of 2006 has been filed out of time. That apart, no evidence was adduced by the petitioner before the Executing Court to show that the property directed to be sold should not have been sold, in view of the prohibition contained under section 60(1)(c) of the Code of Civil Procedure. In a connected case E.P.No.87 of 2005 the learned Munsiff has found that the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of section 60(1)(c) of the Code of Civil Procedure. Therefore, in my view the learned WPC 10450/08 3 Munsiff is perfectly justified in dismissing the petition. That being so, the writ petition has to be dismissed. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed. P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE mn