IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID MONDAY, THE 4TH OCTOBER 2010 / 12TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 38332 of 2008(L) -------------------------- CMA.12/2007 of DISTRICT COURT, MANJERI OS.89/1998 of SUB COURT, MANJERI .................... PETITIONER: --------------- M.K.AHAMMEDKUTTY, S/O. HASANANKUTTY, KOONUMMAL HOUSE, CHEEKODE AMSOM, OMANOOR DESOM, ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.BABU S. NAIR MS.M.T.SHEEBA RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. T.R.JAIN, PROPRIETOR, T.R.FINANCE, SOWCARPET, MADRAS. 2. K.MAJEED, S/O. MOHAMMED, KAVUNGALKANDY HOUSE, OMANOOR P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. ADV. MR.S.SREEKUMAR FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 38332 of 2008(L) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: JUDGMENT AND DECREE OF THE SUB COURT, MANJERI DTD. 31.5.2001 IN O.S.NO.89/1998. EXT.P2: ACKNOWLEDGEMENT RECEIPT DATED 7.6.1998 RETURNED AS 'ADDRESSEE LEFT INDIA'. EXT.P3: ORDER PASSED BY THE SUB COURT, MANJERI DTD.27.3.2007 IN I.A.NOS.461/2006 & 462/2006 IN O.S.NO.89/1998. EXT.P4: ORDER OF THE DISTRICT COURT, MANJERI IN C.M.A.NO.12/2007 DTD.14.10.2008. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL ..... // TRUE COPY // P.A TO JUDGE. HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ------------------------ W.P.(C).No.38332 Of 2008 ---------------------- Dated this the 4th day of October, 2010. J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the first defendant in O.S.No.89 of 1998 on the file of the Sub Court, Manjeri. Suit was filed by the respondent herein as plaintiff for realisation of Rs.1,35,000/- with interest and cost. The defendants were set ex-parte. The court decreed the suit on 31.5.2001. The decree holder filed execution petition for execution of the decree. 2. In 2006 the petitioner filed I.A.No.462 of 2006 for setting aside the ex-parte decree and I.A.No.461 of 2006 for condoning the delay in filing I.A.No.462 of 2006. The Sub Court passed Ext.P3 order on the above said I.As. 3. The court found that the petitioner who is the first defendant in the suit entered appearance in the suit through a lawyer and sought time on several occasions for filing written statement. Subsequently, he remained absent and the ex-parte decree was passed by the court in 31.5.2001. The court also found that the petitioner remained absent till the decree holder sought execution of the decree. On an appreciation of the W.P.(C).No.38332 Of 2008 ::2:: evidence, facts and circumstances the court further held that the attempt of the petitioner is to protract the execution of the decree and that there is no truth in the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of I.A.Nos.461 & 462 of 2006. Ext.P3 order was passed by the court on 27.3.2007. Petitioner filed C.M.A.No.12 of 2007 before the District Court, Manjeri. The appellate court also concurred with the findings of the trial court and on facts held that there are no sufficient cause shown for condoning the inordinate delay in filing the petition to set aside the ex-parte decree and that the learned Sub Judge is justified in dismissing both the applications. 4. In the above facts and circumstances, I fully agree with the findings recorded by the courts below. I find that no sustainable grounds are made out by the petitioner for interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Writ petition fails and accordingly, dismissed. HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge. bkn/-