IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 3RD JANUARY 2008 / 13TH POUSHA 1929 CRP.No. 1121 of 2007() ---------------------- E.P.73/06 IN OS.413/2003 of MUNSIFF COURT, PERUMBAVOOR .................... REVN. PETITIONER: JUDGMENT DEBTOR NO.1/DEFENDANT NO.1 ----------------------------------------------------- P.K.WILSON, S/O.KUNJU (VARKEY), POKKATHAYIL HOUSE, IRINGOLE, PERUMBAVOOR VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.K.SUNILKUMAR RESPONDENTS: DECREE HOLDER/PLAINTIFF/JUDGMENT DEBTOR NO.2-4 ----------------------------------------------------------- 1. PERINGOTTUKARA NAMBOODIRI YOGAKSHEMA SABHA, ANTHICAD, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. P.R.SAJI, S/O.RAMAKRISHNAN, PULICKAPARAMBIL, NOOLELI, ASAMANNOOR KARA, ASAMANNOOR VILLAGE. 3. N.M.LILLY (LILLY WILSON), W/O.P.K.WILSON, POKKATHAYIL HOUSE, IRINGOLE, PERUMBAVOOR VILLAGE. 4. P.M.PAZHANI, S/O.MUTHU, PONATTUKUDY, AIMURY P.O., KOOVAPPADY KARA, KOOVAPPADY. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN,J. -------------------------------------------------------- C.R.P.No.1121 OF 2007 -------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2008 O R D E R This revision is preferred against the order of the Munsiff, Perumbavoor in E.P.No.73/06 in O.S.No.413/03. The grievance of the revision petitioner is that the court below has erred in finding the means and therefore requests for interference. I have gone through the order. PW1 has deposed before the court that the present revision petitioner is running a shoe mart at Kuruppampady and he is earning about Rs.20,000/= per month. Though there is a denial, at least running a shoe mart is admitted by the judgment debtor. So whatever is possible has been adduced by the decree holder and the nonconducting of a shoe mart is not proved, especially in the backdrop of admission by the judgment debtor regarding a license. Therefore, I do not find any ground to interfere with the finding of no means. But, at the same time, it is desirable that a reasonable time be granted for making the payment. Therefore the C.R.P. is disposed of as follows. 1. The finding of means is confirmed. 2. The revision petitioner is permitted to pay the decree amount in six equal monthly instalments commencing from 11.2.2008. C.R.P.No.1121/07 2 3. If he commits default of the first instalment and thereafter of two consecutive instalments, the benefit given to him shall stand cancelled. 4. Since time is given, the arrest warrant against the revision petitioner shall not be executed for the time being. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE. dsn