IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 23RD JANUARY 2009 / 3RD MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 30339 of 2008(J) -------------------------------------------- EP.62/2005 IN AP.132/2000 of DISTRICT COURT, THALASSERY .................... PETITIONER: PLACKEEL MARIYAM, W/O.ABDU, AGED 40, PLACKEEL HOUSE, CHITTADY POST, ALAKODE VIA, TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.T.MADHAVANUNNI SRI.V.A.SATHEESH RESPONDENTS: 1. M/S.MAHARASHTRA APEX CORPORATION LTD., MANIPAL POST, UDUPPI DISTRICT, KARNATAKA STATE REP. BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, P.RAMESH, S/O.KUNHIKANNAN, AGED 40 YEARS, OPP: ASOKA HOSPITAL, SOUTH BAZAR, KANNUR POST, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. MUHAMMED KUNHI K., S/O.IBRAHIM MUSLIAR, KEERANTAKATH HOUSE, CHITTADY POST, ALAKODE VIA, TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DIST. 3. ABDUL SAMAD.K., S/O.IBRAHIM MUSLIAR, KEERANTAKATH HOUSE, CHTTADY POST, ALAKODE VIA, TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.S.R.DAYANANDA PRABHU FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.P. Balachandran, J. -------------------------- W.P.(C)No.30339 of 2008 J -------------------------- JUDGMENT Petitioner is the third judgment debtor in E.P. No.62/05 filed in execution of an arbitration award. It is submitted that respondents 2 and 3 are respectively judgment debtors 1 and 2 in the execution petition. service is not complete for respondents 2 and 3. The first respondent, who is the decree holder, entered appearance. Notice to respondents 2 and 3, who are judgment debtors 1 and 2, is unnecessary and is dispensed with. 2. Counsel for the petitioner and the first respondent submit that the only grievance of the petitioner/third judgment debtor, who has filed this writ petition, is that the court below has ordered sale of the attached property before consideration of the objection filed by him in the court below. In the result, I dispose of this writ petition directing the District Judge, Thalassery to pass WPC 30339/08 2 appropriate orders considering also the objection filed by the petitioner to E.P.No.62/05 and Rule 66 notice before proceeding with sale of the properties, which are under attachment, as expeditiously as possible. 23rd January, 2009 (K.P.Balachandran, Judge) tkv