IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 20TH MARCH 2009 / 29TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 5738 of 2009(O) AGAINST THE ORDER IN EA.527/08 IN EP.80/07 IN OS.73/2006 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,ALAPPUZHA PETITIONER: --------------- P.S.LALU, HOUSE NO.XVIII/815,PROPRIETOR, ALANKAR JEWELLERS,MULLACKAL, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI RESPONDENT: --------------- M.S.MANOJ, MUTAYARATH HOUSE,RAMAPURAM.PO PAKVELI, KOTTAYAM. ADV. SRI.A.T.ANILKUMAR SMT.V.SHYLAJA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) NO. 5738 OF 2009 O ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 20th March, 2009 JUDGMENT The judgment debtor in O.S.No.73 of 2006, on the file of the Sub Court, Alappuzha is the writ petitioner. He challenges the proceedings in execution. When the Writ Petition came up for admission on 20.2.2009, the following order was passed: “On 9th June 2008, the court below passed an order rejecting the contention of the petitioner that he has no means to pay the decree debt. The petitioner did not pay any amount. On 14.7.2008, the court below issued arrest warrant. Even thereafter, no amount was paid. On 15th November 2008, the petitioner filed Ext.P3 application to keep the order issuing warrant in abeyance. As per Ext.P4 dated 17th November 2008, the court below dismissed that application. 2. After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, I was not inclined to admit the Writ Petition. As a last resort, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner may be granted some time to pay the amount. Issue notice before admission to the respondent. The warrant against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance on condition that the petitioner shall pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- within one week and pay another sum of Rs.30,000/- within a period of one month from today. If the amount is not paid as above, the warrant shall be executed forthwith.” 2. It is submitted that Rs.10,000/- was paid. However, the petitioner did not pay Rs.30,000/-. Instead, he paid only Rs.5,000/- and thus, the interim order is not complied with. W.P.(C) NO.5738 OF 2009 :: 2 :: 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner may be permitted to pay off the decree amount in instalments. This is opposed by the learned counsel appearing for the decree holder. 4. In the facts and circumstances of the case, by way of great indulgence, I am inclined to grant instalment facility to the petitioner to pay off the decree amount in monthly instalments of Rs.15,000/- each. The Writ Petition is disposed of as follows: a) The petitioner shall pay off the balance decree amount in monthly instalments of Rs.15,000/-. The first instalment shall be paid on or before 6.4.2009. The second instalment shall be paid on or before 25.5.2009. The subsequent instalments shall be paid on or before 25th of the succeeding months. b) The executing court shall post the case on 7.4.2009. If it is found that the petitioner has not complied with the direction for payment of the first instalment, the execution proceedings shall be continued forthwith. The petitioner shall appear before the executing court on 7.4.2009. W.P.(C) NO.5738 OF 2009 :: 3 :: c) In case of default of payment of any of the instalments, the order passed by the court below issuing warrant against the petitioner shall be executed forthwith. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/