IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 17TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 27685 of 2010(I) -------------------------- RCA.64/2010 of D.C. & SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM RCP.142/2010 of PRL.M.C.,ERNAKULAM (EP 198/2010) .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- JAGADAMMA DAS, AGED 46 YEARS, W/O.K.R.KABEER DAS, KOTTRATHIL HOUSE, HOUSE NO.57/804,MAHAKAVI G.ROAD,ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.SETHUNATH SRI.PRAKASH KESAVAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- V.T.AMBIKA,AGED 62 YEARS,W/O.N.G.KURUP, SOUPARNIKA,PLOT NO.29,JAWAHAR NAGAR,KADAVANTHARA, KOCHI-682 020,REPRESENTED BY THE POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, N.G.KURUP, SOUPARNIKA, PLOT NO.29, JAWAHAR NAGAR,KADAVANTHARA,KOCHI-682 020. ADV. SRI.MANUEL THOMAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. ------------------------ W.P.(C).No.27685 OF 2010 ------------------------ Dated this the 8th day of September, 2010 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. Under challenge in this writ petition under Article 227 is Ext.P5 order passed by the Principal Munsiff's Court, Ernakulam in execution of an order of eviction passed by the Rent Control Court under Section 11(2)(b). In response to the notice that was issued by the Execution Court, the petitioner entered appearance before the Execution Court on 30/7/2010. On that day, considering the request for time made by the petitioner, the E.P. was adjourned to 11/8/2010. On 11/8/2010, the petitioner filed Ext.P4 application seeking one month's time to file objections in the E.P. The Execution Court has passed Ext.P5 order observing that no objection has been filed. By Ext.P5 order, the building is to be delivered over to the respondent decree holder on 9/9/2010. 2. We do not find any infirmity about Ext.P5 order warranting invocation of the visitorial jurisdiction of this Court WPC.No.27685/2010 2 under Article 227 of the Constitution. When the Judgment Debtor does not file objections to the delivery notice sent to him, the Execution Court will be justified in ordering delivery. At the same time, we notice that the order of eviction, which is being executed, is one under Section 11(2)(b) only. Though belatedly, Ext.P4 appeal has been filed and the same is pending. In fact, against Ext.P5, Section 14 of Act 2 of 1965 provides a remedy to the petitioner, yet we feel that a short respite can be given to the petitioner imposing proper conditions. It is submitted by Sri.Manuel Thomas, learned counsel for the respondent that as on today the arrears of rent due from the petitioner will come to Rs.38,000/- . 3. Under the above circumstances, we dispose of the writ petition issuing following directions; i). The learned Munsiff will keep the order of delivery passed in E.P.No.198/2010 in abeyance by 10 days on condition that on or before 13/9/2010 the petitioner will pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- to the respondent towards the rent found to be in arrears by the Rent Control Court and produce receipt before the Execution Court. WPC.No.27685/2010 3 ii). The Execution Court will first keep the order of delivery in abeyance till 14/9/2010 and on verification if it is revealed that payment as ordered above is made, the order keeping in abeyance will continue till 20th September 2010. . iii). If payment is not made as ordered above, the Execution Court will be justified in effecting delivery on 14th September itself. It is open to the petitioner to pursue statutory remedies available to him on Ext.P4 in the meanwhile. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE dpk