IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 15TH JUNE 2010 / 25TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 18243 of 2010(O) -------------------------- OS.779/2001 of PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT, CHERTHALA .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- C.P.BOSE LAL, S/O.PADMANABHAN, CHIRATHARA HOUSE, KARIKAD PO, THANNEERMUKKOM. BY ADV. SRI.R.AZAD BABU RESPONDENT(S): --------------- UNION BANK OF INDIA,CHERTHALA BRANCH REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANGER, CHERTHALA NORTH VILLAGE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO.18243/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF DECREE DATED 27.3.2003 PASSED IN OS 779/2001 BY PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, CHERTHALA EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF EP NO.854/2004 DATED 2.12.2004 FILED BY RESPONDENT BEFORE THE EXECUTION COURT EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT DATED 2.12.2004 FILED ALONG WITH EP BY THE RESPONDENT EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 29.8.2005 PASSED BY THE EXECUTION COURT EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 25.11.2009 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER //TRUE COPY// THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.18243 of 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of June, 2010. JUDGMENT Petitioner who is the Judgment debtor in O.S.No.779 of 2001 of the court of learned Principal Munsiff, Cherthala challenges Ext.P4, order issuing warrant to him, according to him without conducting any enquiry as to his means.Notice on this petition was served on the standing counsel for respondent. 2. It is seen from Ext.P4, order that for the reason that petitioner had not preferred any objection executing court has ordered warrant to the petitioner. It is not shown that there was any enquiry conducted regarding means of petitioner. Executing court can issue warrant only on the finding that judgment debtor inspite of having sufficient means has neglected or failed to pay amount due under the decree. In that there is no evidence or finding regarding means of petitioner the impugned order cannot stand and is liable to be set aside. It will be open to the respondent to adduce evidence regarding means of the petitioner. Petitioner also will get the opportunity to adduce evidence in support of his contention if any. Writ Petition succeeds. The order under challenge is set aside and the matter is remitted to the executing court for fresh decision after giving both sides opportunity to adduce evidence. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks