IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH JULY 2011 / 22ND ASHADHA 1933 OP(C).No. 2231 of 2011(O) ------------------------- OS.205/2002 of PRL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER :- ---------------------- KRISHNA KUMAR (UNNI), AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.LATE PUTHOOR NARAYANAN NAIR, PROPRIETOR, KRIPA FILMS,'VIJAYA SARAS' NEAR SBT HEAD OFFICE, POOJAPPURA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.BALAGOVINDAN SRI.T.K.ANANDA PADMANABHAN RESPONDENT(S) :- ------------------------- S.SREEKANTH, S/O.LATE SADASIVAN PILLAI, 'REMYA', TC 17/1424, POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 012. THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: jvt OP(C).No. 2231 OF 2011 APPENDIX Petitioner's Exhibits :- Ext.P1 :- Copy of the order dated 14-6-2011 in I.A.No.5677/2008 in O.S.No.205/2002 Ext.P2 :- Copy of the receipt evidencing the remittance of Rs.1,50,000/- on 14-9- 2010. Respondent's Exhibits :- NIL. //True Copy// P.A. to Judge THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ O.P.(C). No.2231 of 2011 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 13th day of July 2011 J U D G M E N T Condition imposed by the learned Principal Sub Judge, Thiruvananthapuram on I.A.No.5677 of 2008 in O.S.No.205 of 2002 is under challenge. Learned Sub Judge passed an ex-parte decree against petitioner for recovery of around `4,30,000/-. Later, petitioner filed applications to set aside the ex-parte decree and to condone the delay. Learned Sub Judge allowed the applications on condition that petitioner deposits `3,00,000/- within one month (obviously as security) and a further sum of `2,000/- by way of cost (payable to the respondent). The excessiveness of the condition regarding deposit of `3,00,000/- is under challenge. 2. If the said condition is not complied and ultimately I.A.No.5677 of 2008 results in a dismissal, that O.P.(C). No.2231 of 2011 -: 2 :- order is subject to an appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure. Petitioner has the opportunity to challenge the ultimate order that may be passed on I.A.No.5677 of 2008 in appeal as above stated and in that appeal challenge the excessiveness of any of the amount ordered to be deposited. As such interference with the condition in this proceeding is not required. Resultantly reserving the right of petitioner to challenge the ultimate order that may be passed on I.A.No.5677 of 2008 in appeal and the excessiveness if any of the amount ordered to be deposited, this original petition is closed. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. Jvt