IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST JULY 2009 / 10TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 18387 of 2009(O) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN EP 484/2008 IN OS.415/2004 of PRL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- B.S.SHYAMKUMAR, WORKING AS LAB ASSISTANT (PHYSICS), S.N.COLLEGE, CHEMPAZHANTHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. MR.SERGI JOSEPH THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- SANTHAKUMARI AMMA, MADATHIL VEEDU, SWAMIYARMADOM, CHENKOTTAKONAM, CHEMPAZHANTHY MURI, ULIYAZHUTHURA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.18387 of 2009 - O --------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of June, 2009 J U D G M E N T This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: “To issue a writ of certiorari or such other order or direction, calling for the records and proceedings leading up to Ext.P5 and quash the same.” 2. Petitioner is the judgment debtor in E.P.No.484/2008 in O.S.No.45/2004 on the file of the Principal Sub court, Thiruvananthapuram. Resisting the execution of the decree, petitioner pleaded no means pursuant to the notice issued under Order XXI Rule 37 CPC. Decree holder, a lady aged 70 years, got herself examined as PW1 in the enquiry under the above rule and she gave evidence that the petitioner/judgment debtor employed as a Lab Assistant in a College is possessed of sufficient means to discharge the decree debt. No contra evidence was let in by the judgment debtor. The learned Principal Sub Judge, after considering the materials placed, negatived the plea of no means raised by the judgment debtor and issued a warrant against him. Ext.p5 is the copy of that order. Propriety and correctness of Ext.P5 order is impeached by the petitioner invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this Court under Article 227 W.P.(C).No.18387 of 2009 - O 2 of the Constitution of India. 3. I heard the counsel for the petitioner. 4. No material was placed by the decree holder before the execution court to disprove the plea canvassed by the petitioner/judgment debtor that he is possessed of sufficient means and so much so, Ext.P5 order is unsustainable under law, is the submission of the learned counsel. I am not impressed with that submission. The decree holder got herself examined and she gave evidence that the petitioner/judgment debtor employed as a Lab Assistant in a College is possessed of sufficient means. Her sworn testimony which remained unimpeached, was found acceptable and credible by the Principal Sub Judge. The judgment debtor did not even mount the box to swear in support of his case that he is not possessed of means. There is no impropriety or illegality in Ext.P5 order. The writ petition is devoid of any merit, and it is dismissed. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. bkn/-