IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN FRIDAY, THE 9TH APRIL 2010 / 19TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 13068 of 2010(O) --------------------------------------- OS.1173/2002 of PRL.MUNSIFF COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- LEELA @ DAISY, PANAVILA PUTHUKUNNU VEEDU, MELULIYAZHATHURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP.BY HER BROTHER AND POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER N.PRADEEP, S/O.GEORGE, RESIDING AT PANAVILA PUTHUKUNNU VEEDU, MELULIYAZHATHURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. MR.B.S.SWATHY KUMAR SMT.P.A.ANITHA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- VIJAYAMMA, D/O. MEENAKSHI, PUTHUVAL PUTHUVAL PUTHENVEEDU, VATTAKARIKKAKOM, POZHIKONAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/04/2010 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss P. BHAVADASAN, J --------------------------- W.P.(C).No.13068 OF 2010 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of April, 2010 J U D G M E N T Ext.P3 is under challenge. 2. Petitioner filed O.S.1173/02 which was a suit for recovery of money. Suit was decreed. In appeal filed by the respondent, the appellate court directed the appellant to deposit the decree amount. Appeal preferred by the petitioner was dismissed and the cross appeal filed by the respondent was allowed partly enhancing the rate of interest to 12%. 3. After disposal of the appeal and cross appeal the petitioner filed E.P.59/10 for execution of decree. Application was also filed as E.A.82/10 praying for disbursement of the amount to the petitioner, copy of which is Ext.P2. Copy of Ext.P2 was served on the respondent, judgment debtor also. The petitioner filed a petition to advance the execution petition to 20.3.2010. When the W.P.(c) No.13068/10 2 matter came up for hearing on that day, the judgment debtor reported that she had no objection in decree holder withdrawing the amount. But instead of ordering releasing of the amount, the court below has passed Ext.P3 order. 4. It is difficult to understand the order passed by the court below. The decree amount was deposited by the judgment debtor and the decree holder wanted the amount deposited to be withdrawn. The judgment debtor had no objection in releasing the amount. Instead of granting the prayer the court below has passed the impugned order. The court is directed to pass final order of E.A. Filed by the decree holder taking into consideration the stand of the judgment debtor. If judgment debtor has reported no objection E.A. shall be allowed. P. BHAVADASAN, JUDGE. Sou.