IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 8TH OCTOBER 2009 / 16TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 24031 of 2009(O) --------------------------------------- E.P.NO.42/2008 IN OS.231/2003 of MUNSIF COURT, KANJIRAPPALLY .................... PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- JAMES T.JOY, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O. K.C.THOMAS, KAKKAPARA HOUSE, MANIMALA KARA, MANIMALA VILLAGE, KANJIRAPPALLY TALUK, REP. HEREIN BY HIS NEXT FRIEND AND FATHER MR.K.C.THOMAS, S/O. CHACKO, KAKKAPARA HOUSE, MANIMALA KARA, MANIMALA VILLAGE, KANJIRAPPALLY TALUK. BY ADV. MR.K.R.VINOD RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF --------------------------------------------------------- O.N. HARIDAS, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O. NARAYANA PILLAI, ULAKU HOUSE, CHIRAKKADAVU VILLAGE, VADAKKUMBAGOM KARA, KANJIRAPPILLY TALUK. BY ADV. MR.LIJI.J.VADAKEDOM . THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 24031/2009-O APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE PROCLAMATION PRODUCED BY THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE OBJECTION TO THE SALE PROCLAMATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT KANJIRAPPALLY DATED 03/08/2009. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.24031 OF 2009 (O) ----------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T The judgment debtor in E.P.No.42 of 2008 in O.S.No.231 of 2001 has filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P3 order passed by the execution court ordering the sale of his property to satisfy the decree debt. Notice given, the respondent/decree holder has entered appearance through counsel. 2. I heard the counsel on both sides. Taking note that Ext.P3 order is a cryptic order, which does not spell out reasons, through the registry, the proceedings conducted by the court prior to the order for sale was collected. The information gathered disclose that after objections were filed by the judgment debtor, no opportunity was extended to him for presenting arguments on such objections. After filing of the objections by the judgment debtor, as seen from the WPC.24031/09 2 details collected by the Registry, no order was passed by the court applying its mind with respect to the objections canvassed before ordering for settling the proclamation. Ext.P3 order does not reflect the application of the mind with respect to settling up of proclamation. I am not expressing a view that the court has to pass a detailed order while ordering for settling of proclamation, but, settling of proclamation is not an empty formality. With reference to the objections raised by the judgment debtor, a brief order has to be passed by the court while settling the proclamation and there should be a further order for publication of that proclamation for such settlement, and then of posting the case for sale 15 days after such publication, as provided by Rule 66 of Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure. Ext.P3 order is set aside, and the court below is directed to settle the proclamation in accordance with the rule, and then proceed with the sale. The execution court is directed to complete the exercise over the settling of the proclamation expeditiously and pass orders within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of thus judgment. WPC.24031/09 3 Writ petition is disposed as indicated. Send a copy to the court concerned forthwith. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE prp