IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 18TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 29TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 5689 of 2008(B) ------------------------- OS.1764/1999 of M.C.,VADAKKANCHERRY .................... PETITIONER: ------------ OUSEPH,S/O.MURINGATHERI THACHUNNI KUNNATHERI DESOM,KARIYANNUR VILLAGE TALAPPILLY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH SRI.V.C.MADHAVANKUTTY RESPONDENT: ------------- ROY,S/O.PORATHUKKARAN JOS, KUZHIKKATTUKONAM DESOM, MADAYIKONAM VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- W.P.(C). NO. 5689 OF 2008 --------------------- Dated this the 18th day of February, 2008 JUDGMENT This writ petition is preferred to set aside Ext.P1 order. This is an interesting case wherein the civil case also at the stage of execution, identity of the person is attempted to be disputed. The decree holder obtained a decree for Rs.40,250/- against one Thomas, son of Muringatheri Thachunny. EP 242/03 was filed. Notice was issued. The said notice was returned as “address not correct.” Subsequently notice was issued to Thomas Alias Ouseph. The said notice was personally served and the person named in the summons appeared before the court and contended that he is not the person mentioned in the decree and his name and address is Muringathery Thachunny Ouseph. The court below thereafter directed the Village Officer, Kariyannur, to file a report regarding the identity of the person in dispute. After verifying the voters list, partition deed and basic tax register, he filed a report that the person named Thomas, son of Muringatheri Thachunny and the present Thomas Alias Ouseph are one and the same person. This was accepted by the court below and the contention of the writ petitioner WPC NO 5689/08 2 was rejected. The Village Officer is a competent person under the Government Orders to submit a report. He after due enquiry and proper verification of authenticated records came to the conclusion regarding the identity of the person. The court below has accepted it and thereafter rejected the contention of the petitioner. I do not find any illegality or irregularity in the order passed by the court below. The writ petition lacks merit and it is accordingly dismissed. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps WPC NO 5689/08 3