IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 10TH JANUARY 2011 / 20TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 4906 of 2010(O) ----------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN EP 30/2007 IN OS.566/2002 of SUB COURT,THRISSUR .................... PETITIONER(S)/JUDGEMENT DEBTOR :- -------------------------------------------------------- SINDHU JOSE, AGED 35 YEARS, D/O.FRANCIS, PERUMATHIL, PULLAZHI, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.N.K.MOHANLAL RESPONDENT(S)/DECREE HOLDER :- --------------------------------------------------- M/S.SUNNY AND COMPANY,MERCHANTS AND COMMISSION AGENTS,REPRESENTED .V.P.VARUNNI, MANAGING PARTNER,RICE BAZAR,THRISSUR, S/O.VADAKKAN PAUL ERAVATH LANE,EAST FORT, THRISSUR-5. ADV. SRI.N.SUKUMARAN FOR R SRI.S.SHYAM FOR R THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: jvt WP(C).No. 4906 of 2010 APPENDIX Petitioner's Exhibits :- Ext.P1 :- Copy of Execution Petition No.30/2007. Ext.P2 :- Copy of Objection filed by JD to Rue 66 notice. Ext.P3 :- Copy of amended draft sale proclamation filed by DH. Ext.P4 :- Copy of said draft sale schedule. Ext.P5 :- Copy of objection filed by JD. Respondent's Exhibits :- NIL //True Copy// P.A. to Judge N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J. -------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.4906 of 2010 --------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of January 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the Judgment Debtor in E.P.30/2007 in O.S.566/2002 of Sub Court, Thrissur. It is stated that for realisation of a sum of Rs.5,14,318.89, which was then due the respondent filed execution petition. It is stated that a sum of Rs.1 lakh was paid during the pendency of the E.P. According to the learned counsel for the Decree Holder including the interest that fell due subsequently, the amount as on today may be more than Rs.6,00,000/-. 2. The main grievance of the petitioner is that entire 22 cents of land belonging to the petitioner has been proclaimed for sale which if materialised would cause undue hardship to the petitioner. There is no dispute regarding the fact that only that much portion of the land which is actually required to satisfy the decree debt should be proclaimed for W.P.(C) No.4906 of 2010 -: 2 :- sale. For that purpose, the aforesaid 22 cents of land may have to be divided into plots. For convenience, it would be proper to make it 3 plots measuring 7 cents, 7 cents and 8 cents respectively. The valuation in respect of each of the plots should be separately shown. That apart a plan of the property showing plots separately should also be produced. The plots aforesaid shall be sold lot by lot, that is, one after another. That means, if sale of one lot itself satisfies the decree debt the other two plots need not be sold. So much so, the direction issued by the court below to sell the entire property of 22 cents as a single lot cannot be sustained. 3. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if 2 cents of land may fetch the amount required to satisfy the decree debt, it would be practically impossible to sell a plot of 2 cents. The learned counsel for the petitioner/Judgment Debtor has also made a fervent request to allow the Judgment Debtor to pay the decree debt in 20 instalments. That request is vehemently opposed by the learned counsel for the Decree Holder. W.P.(C) No.4906 of 2010 -: 3 :- 4. However, considering the hardship that may be caused to the Judgment Debtor, I find that it would be just and proper that the Judgment Debor is allowed to pay the entire decree debt in 15 equal monthly instalments; provided the Judgment Debtor files an affidavit within two weeks from today undertaking that she will pay off the entire decree debt due to the Decree Holder in 15 equal monthly instalments commencing from February 10th, 2011 and that she will not commit breach of the undertaking given by her. In other words, if she fails to pay any of the instalments then it will entail in withdrawal of this concession whereupon the Decree Holder can request the Execution Court to bring to sale the property which has been proclaimed for sale, lot by lot as stated earlier. This writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Jvt W.P.(C) No.4906 of 2010 -: 4 :- The order passed on 18/01/2016 in R.P 80/2014 in W.P.(C) No.4906/2010 withdrawing the direction “to divide the property sought to be sold into three and sell them separately” is appended. Sd/- Registrar (Judicial)