IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 14TH AUGUST 2009 / 23RD SRAVANA 1931 CRP.No. 209 of 2009() ------------------------------ EP 495/2008 IN OS.218/2000 of MUNSIFF COURT, KODUNGALLUR .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S)/JD 2 --------------------------------------- LAL, S/O. PARAMESWARAN, RESIDING AT PUTHENKATTIL HOUSE, EDAVILANGU VILLAGE, KUNDUNGALLURE. BY ADV. MR.P.K.RAMKUMAR RESPONDENTS/DECREE HOLDERS ---------------------------------------------------- 1. VELUGOURI EDUCATION TRUST, PADAKULAM DESOM, METHALA VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK, REPRESENTED BY (1)CHAIRMAN, HARIDAS S/O. PLAKKAPARAMBIL VELU, ANAPUZHA DESOM, METHALA VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK. 2. TRUSTEE - MOHANAN, S/O. AYYARIYIL SIVARAMAN, -DO- -DO- 3. PRAKASAN (JD 1), S/O. PULLARAKKATT SREEDHARAN, METHALA VILLAGE, KODUNGALLORE TALUK. BY THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------- C.R.P.NO.209 OF 2009 (E) ----------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of August, 2009 O R D E R Revision is filed against the order dated 27.2.2009 in E.P.No.495 of 2008 in O.S.No.218 of 2000 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Kodungallur. The 2nd judgment debtor in the execution petition against whom a warrant was ordered by the court has filed this revision impeaching the propriety and correctness of that order. He has raised a plea of no means to resist the execution. The decree holder was examined in the enquiry. No evidence was produced by the 2nd judgment debtor to substantiate his plea. Execution court was satisfied with the evidence of the decree holder to conclude that the plea of no means raised by the petitioner/2nd judgment debtor is meritless. On such conclusion, the execution court passed the impugned order directing issue of warrant against the petitioner/2nd judgment debtor. CRP.209/09 2 2. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. It is submitted the petitioner was only a surety to the transaction. Whatever that be, when a decree is passed, he is liable to pay the decree debt. Plea of no means raised by the petitioner has been found to be meritless. There is no impropriety, illegality or irregularity in the order impugned passed by the learned Munsiff. Revision is dismissed. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE prp