IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH DECEMBER 2010 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 OP(C).No. 1180 of 2010(O) ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN EP 353/09 IN OS.680/2008 of PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT , THIRUVANANTHAPURAM .................... PETITIONERS(S): -------------------- C.VELAPPAN NAIR, S/O.CHELLAPPAN PILLAI, ACCOUNTANT, WORKING AS DA & E6, ACCOUNTANT GENERAL'S OFFICE (A&E), STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.A.B.MOHANAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- CHANDRALEKHA, T.C.77/2612, KEEZHA VEEDU, VAYYAMMOOLA, VALLAKKADAVU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695 008. THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- O.P.(C) No.1180 of 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of December, 2010. JUDGMENT This petition is filed by the judgment debtor in E.P.No.353 of 2009 in O.S.No.680 of 2008 of the court of learned Principal Munsiff, Thiruvananthapuram. He has suffered a money decree which he has challenged in A.S.No.81 of 2009. He has also moved an application for stay of execution of the decree. But, since the appeal was preferred after 37 days of the prescribed time and an application to condone the delay is pending, appellate court could not pass orders on his application for stay. Learned counsel states that the application to condone the delay is now posted on 21.01.2011 for appearance and that respondent has been served on that application. In the meantime, in the absence of any stay from the appellate court executing court proceeded with execution and issued warrant of arrest against petitioner. Ext.P8, letter has been addressed to the employer of petitioner to relieve him from his duties to facilitate the arrest. Hence this petition requesting to set aside Ext.P8, re-call the warrant of arrest and to direct executing court to dispose of E.P.No.353 of 2009 after considering objection of petitioner. Learned counsel submits that if before the application for stay is taken up for hearing, petitioner is arrested he will be put to irreparable loss and injury. Having heard learned counsel and perused the records placed before me, I am inclined to grant some relief to the petitioner but, subject to condition. OP(C) No.1180/2010 2 Resultantly this petition is disposed of in the following lines: It is directed that warrant of arrest issued to the petitioner in E.P. No.353 of 2009 in O.S. No.680 of 2008 of the court of learned Principal Munsiff, Thiruvananthapuram will stand in abeyance till 31.01.2011 subject to the condition that petitioner shall deposit in the executing court for payment to respondent `.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty five thousand) on or before 03.01.2011. In the meantime it will be open to the petitioner to request learned Additional Sub Judge, Thiruvananthapuram to pass appropriate orders on the applications to condone the delay and stay of execution of the decree. The amount if any deposited by the petitioner could be withdrawn by the respondent on proper security and subject to the result of the appeal. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks