IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 30TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 8TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 28410 of 2008(F) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 06/09/2008 IN EP.275/2006 IN OS.43/2005 of MUNSIFF-MAGISTRATE'S.COURT,PERINTHALMANNA .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.ALIKUTTY, S/O. KOMU, KALLUPALAN HOUSE PERINTHALMANNA AMSOM DESOM, MALAPPURAM DT. BY ADV. SRI.DEVIDAS.U.K RESPONDENT(S): --------------- K.DAMODHARAN, S/O. LATE N.P.KUTTISANKARA MENON, 'ARADHANA' ANGADIPURAM AMSOM DESOM, PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, MALAPPURAM DT. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/09/2008, ALONG WITH W.P.C. 28461/08 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) Nos. 28410 of 2008 & 28461 of 2008 --------------------------------------- Dated: 30-09-2008 JUDGMENT The common petitioner is the judgment debtor in two suits for money filed as O.S. No. 43 of 2005 and O.S. 89 of 2005 on the file of the Munsiff-Magistrate's Court Perinthalmanna. Both the suits were decree on 29-08-2006 and the decree has become final. The decree holder filed Ext.P1 order in E.P. No. 275 of 2006 in W.P.C. 28410 of 2008 and E.P. No. 283 of 2006 in W.P. (c ) No.28461 of 2008 for executing the decree. The E.P. Amount in O.S. No. 43 of 2005 was Rs. 63,474/- and in O.S. No. 89 of 2004 the decree amount was Rs. 64,060/-. At one stage of the execution proceedings the petitioner approached this Court W.P.(C) Nos. 28410 of 2008 & 28461 of 2008 -:2:- alleging that even though the salary certificate of the petitioner showed that his surviving income after excluding the deductions therefrom was only one rupee per month and that the executing court below had gone wrong in reaching a conclusion that the petitioner has means to pay the decree debt. This Court has in the judgment dated 13-11-2007 in W.P. (c ) 33410 of 2007 set aside the order for arrest passed by the executing court and remanded the case back to that court directing both sides to adduce evidence in support of their respective contentions. Thereafter Ext.P7 order dated 6-09-2008 the executing court after relying on the evidence adduced by the decree holder including the testimony of P.W.1 and Exts.A1 to A3 has came to the conclusion that the petitioner had the means to pay the decree debt and was evading the debt. Accordingly, this Court issued arrest warrant against W.P.(C) Nos. 28410 of 2008 & 28461 of 2008 -:3:- the petitioner. It is the said order which is assailed in these Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 2. Eventhough the learned counsel for the petitioner re-iterated the contentions made by the judgment debtor/petitioner, including the one that going by the salary certificate his take home salary was only one rupee per month, the court below has given valid reasons as to why the petitioner had the means to pay the decree debt. If, really the petitioner's take home salary was only one rupee every month as contended by the petitioner, one fails to understand as to how he could file Writ Petitions one after the other before this Court and get the execution proceedings at bay. The finding recorded by the court below is a pure finding of fact. I am not inclined to interfere with the said finding sitting in the rarefied W.P.(C) Nos. 28410 of 2008 & 28461 of 2008 -:4:- visitorial jurisdiction of this Court under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India. In case, the petitioner deposits a sum of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) in cases before the executing court within on month fron today, that court shall, after hearing both sides consider the question of granting the installment facility to the petitioner for the balance amount. The arrest warrant issued against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance for a period of one month to enable the petitioner to deposit the sum of Rs. 15,000/- in each cases. If the court below grants installment facility to the petitioner the issuance of arrest warrant shall be subject to such further orders. These Writ Petitions are disposed of as above. V. Ramkumar, Judge. W.P.(C) Nos. 28410 of 2008 & 28461 of 2008 -:5:-