IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2009 / 28TH ASWINA 1931 CRP.No. 437 of 2009(A) --------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 08/07/2009 IN IA.NO.108/2007 IN OS.NO.151/2005 OF SUB COURT,KOCHI. .................... REVISION PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS IN I.A/DEFENDANTS: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. P.P.MATHEW, S/O.PAPPACHAN, AGED 75 YEARS, PANACKAL HOUSE, NARAKKAL P.O, NARAKKAL DESOM, NARAKKAL VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK. 2. BINU MATHEW, S/O.MATHEW, AGED 39 YEARS, PANACKAL HOUSE, NARAKKAL P.O, NARAKKAL DESOM, NARAKKAL VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK. BY ADV. MR.M.M.ALIAS. RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN I.A/PLAINTIFF: -------------------------------------------------------------------- JEMMA, W/O.GEORGE, AGED 54 YEARS CHAKKALAKKAL HOUSE, NAYARAMBALM KARA, NAYARANMBALAM VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK. BY ADVS. MR.MATHEW JOHN (K), MR.AJEESH K.SASI. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------- C.R.P.No.437 OF 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of October 2009 ------------------------------------- ORDER Revision is filed against the order dated 08/07/2009 in O.S No.151 of 2005 on the file of the Sub Court, Kochi. Against the petitioners, an exparte decree for money was passed in favour of the respondent. Petitioners moved an application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure for setting aside the exparte decree with a petition to condone delay. That application was allowed subject to a condition that petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) before the court. Challenging the propriety and correctness of that order, the above revision has been filed before this court. The revision was admitted with direction to the petitioner to deposit one half of the amount C.R.P.No.437 OF 2009 Page numbers ordered by the court below, ie, Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) within one month from the order dated 07/08/2009. That amount has not been deposited so far. 2. I heard the counsel on both sides. Perusing the order challenged in the revision and having regard to the submissions made by the counsel on both sides, I find no impropriety or illegality in the order impugned. Revision lacks merit, and it is dismissed. Sd/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE vdv