IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2009 / 17TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 19094 of 2009(O) -------------------------- OS.43/2003 of MUNSIFF COURT, MAVELIKKARA .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- MATHEW VARGHESE, S/O.VARGHESE, NADUVALLIL VEEDU, KUNNAM, KAVELIKKARA. BY ADV. SRI.K.R.VINOD RESPONDENT(S): --------------- BALAKRISHNA CHITTY FUND (REGD), NEDUVARAMCODE, REPRESETNED BY MANAGING PARTNER MR.V.K.BALAKRISHNAN, BALAKRISHNA BHAVAN, ALA THEKKUM MURI, ALA VILLAGE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/07/2009 ALONGWITH W.P.(C).NO.19139/2009 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).NOS.19094, 19139, 19140 & 19141 OF 2009 (O) ----------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of July, 2009 J U D G M E N T These writ petitions are filed by a judgment debtor, who is being proceeded in execution of decrees passed in four suits, all by the common respondent. In all the four suits for recovery of money an ex parte decree was passed in terms of the plaint. When execution was taken, petitioner/judgment debtor raised a plea of no means which was found against. He preferred a writ petition before this Court as WPC.12239/08, and that was disposed by judgment dated 9.4.2008 at the admission stage, granting the petitioner the relief of discharging the decree debts in all the cases by way of instalment payments. Subsequently, when a default occurred in payment of instalment, petitioner approached this Court again for extension of time and that was also granted subject to the condition that the entire decree debts should be W.P.(C).NOS.19094, 19139, 19140 & 19141 OF 2009 (O) 2 discharged on the extended period fixed by this Court. After repayment of the entire decree debts, pursuant to the directions/orders given by this Court, it is the case of the petitioner that the decree holder filed statement in each cases claiming balance amount due under the decree. It appears that the petitioner raised a contention that by way of instalment payment he had discharged the debt due under the decree in compliance with the orders passed by this Court. The learned Munsiff, after having an enquiry over the matter repelled the objections raised by the judgment debtor and the decree holder was permitted to take steps for realisation of the balance amount. Legality, propriety and correctness of the orders, separately, passed in all the four execution petitions relating to the decrees are challenged by the judgment debtor filing these writ petitions invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. Having regard to the facts and circumstances W.P.(C).NOS.19094, 19139, 19140 & 19141 OF 2009 (O) 3 presented and after perusing the materials tendered with the writ petition, I find that no notice to the respondent/decree holder is necessary, and hence, it is dispensed with. 3. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. A copy of the execution petition in one of the cases, which contains the decretal portion, was brought to my notice by the learned counsel for the petitioner, which indicate in unmistakable terms that interest is awarded only on the principal sum claimed in the suit. Statement filed by the decree holder in the execution petition, copy of which is appended to the respective writ petition would show that the decree holder has claimed interest not on the principal amount alone, but, after payment of each instalment such sum is adjusted on the total amount outstanding sum of principal amount with interest on the date of remittance of instalment payment. If the decree does not provide for payment of interest on interest, the court cannot allow the decree holder to realise that sum from the judgment debtor. Needless to point out, whatever amount W.P.(C).NOS.19094, 19139, 19140 & 19141 OF 2009 (O) 4 paid by the judgment debtor by instalment, has to be adjusted initially towards the interest accruing on the principal amount and then only towards the principal amount. Once such instalment payment is reckoned, the decree holder is entitled to calculate interest only on the principal amount and not on the amount left over as balance with the principal amount with interest. So much so, in the given facts of the case, the court below has to examine the decree granted to the decree holder and his entitlement on the claim raised under his statement. To ascertain and enable the court to fix the actual outstanding sum due under the decree the petitioner/judgment debtor has to be given an opportunity to file a counter statement. The decree holder can also be permitted to file a fresh statement recalculating the sum due, after instalment payments, under the decree. If both sides or any of the parties file statement as indicated within the time fixed, the court has to examine such statement with reference to the decree and appropriate orders have to be passed directing the judgment debtor to pay the balance amount, which is actually due from him under the W.P.(C).NOS.19094, 19139, 19140 & 19141 OF 2009 (O) 5 decree to the decree holder. 4. The orders impugned in the writ petition passed by the court below are set aside directing that court to conduct a fresh enquiry and complete such enquiry within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till such enquiry is conducted and orders are passed, distraint steps against the judgment debtor be kept in abeyance on condition that the judgment debtor deposit a sum of Rs.15,000/- within a period of three weeks from the date of this judgment and the sum so deposited shall be adjusted towards the dues outstanding on one or more of the decrees. 5. Send a copy of this judgment to the court below forthwith. 6. Petitioner is directed to appear before the court below on 27.7.2009 and the court below, on receipt of the judgment, shall give notice to the decree holder to appear on W.P.(C).NOS.19094, 19139, 19140 & 19141 OF 2009 (O) 6 that date to proceed with the enquiry as directed above. Handover a copy of the judgment to the counsel for the petitioner on usual terms. Writ petitions are disposed with the above directions. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE prp S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. -------------------------------------------------------- CRL.R.P.NO. OF 2006 () --------------------------------------------------------- O R D E R --------------------------------------------------------- 23rd March, 2009