IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 6TH JUNE 2011 / 16TH JYAISHTA 1933 FAO.No. 15 of 2011 --------------------------- [IA.NO. 9085/2009 IN OS.NO.540/2005 OF I ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, THRISSUR] .................... APPELLANT IN F.A.O/PETITIONER NO.1 IN I.A/DEFENDANT NO.1. IN O.S: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- T.M.SNEHAPRABHA, W/O.MANAYATH M.K.VENUGOPAL, VENUS VEEDU, NO.50/602, CHUTTUPADUKARA, EDAPPALLY NORTH VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK. BY ADVS. SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN, SRI.R.SURAJ KUMAR, SMT.GEETHA P.MENON, SRI.P.M.NEELAKANDAN. RESPONDENTS IN F.A.O/RESPONDENT & PETITIONERS 2 AND 3 IN E.A- DECREE-HOLDER AND JUDGMENT-DEBTORS 2 AND 3 IN SUIT: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SWADESI CHITS PVT.LTD., REGD. OFFICE AT CHEMBUKAVU VILLAGE AND POST, THRISSUR TALUK, PIN – 680 002. 2. T.MAHILAMANI, W/O.NILAMBARI DR.K.K.VELAYUDHAN, CHITTATTUKARA DESOM, PARAVUR VILLAGE AND POST, PIN – 683 514. 3. M.K.VENUGOPAL, S/O.MANAYATH KANNAN, VENUS VEEDU, NO.50/602, CHUTTUPADUKARA, EDAPPALLY NORTH VILLAGE & POST, KANAYANNUR TALUK, PIN – 682 024. BY ADVS. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR), SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH). THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JJ. ----------------------------------- F.A.O.No.15 OF 2011 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 6th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan,J. The first defendant in a suit filed by a chitty foreman is the appellant. He challenges an order by which the court below dismissed an application to set aside an ex parte decree and an application seeking condonation of around two years of delay in filing such application. The contention of the appealing first defendant is that she was not aware of the litigation in so far as the ex parte decree is concerned and that she was advised rest as she had fallen ill. Having considered the different aspects of the matter on the merits also, we had directed the appellant to pay to the decree holder an amount of Rs.1 Lakh. This has admittedly been done. The total outstandings under the decree is less than Rs.3 lakhs. We are inclined to think that the appellant can be granted an opportunity to contest the suit on merits if she furnishes FAO.15/11 2 security to the satisfaction of the court below for the remaining portion of the decree. For the aforesaid reasons, we set aside the impugned order and allow the FAO on condition that the appellant will furnish security to the satisfaction of the court below for the decree debt as on today, less an amount of Rs.1 lakh, within a period of 45 days. Obviously, the trial court will further proceed with the matter only if the appellant satisfies the condition imposed as per this judgment. If that is not done, this FAO will stand dismissed. The parties are directed to appear before the court below on 1.8.2011. If the directions as aforesaid are not complied with and resultantly the FAO stands dismissed, the executing court will give due credit for the amount of Rs.1 lakh, payment of which is recorded by us herein. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. Sd/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, Judge. kkb.6/6.