IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID THURSDAY, THE 29TH MAY 2008 / 8TH JYAISHTA 1930 CRP.No. 1328 of 2003() ---------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 24/10/2002 IN EA.43/2000 IN EP.134/1990 IN OS.185/1982 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,KOCHI .................... REVN. PETITIONER:PETITIONER /PETITIONER/DECREE HOLDER/PLAINTIFF --------------------------------------------------------------- M.V.MATHEW, S/O.VARKEY, MANICKANAMPARAMBIL, NADUVILA VEETTIL, UDAYAMPEROOR, NADAKKAVU, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.M.V.JOHN SRI.RENJU JOHN SRI.B.JAYAPARAKASH RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS/JUDGEMENT DEBTORS/DEFENDANTS ----------------------------------------------------- 1. G.SUGUNAN, 'ANUPAMA', PALLIKAL ROAD, THOPPUMPADY MURI, RAMESWARAM VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK. 2. THANKAMMA, W/O.G.SUGUNAN, 'ANUPAMA', PALLIKAL ROAD, THOPPUMPADY MURI, RAMESWARAM VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK, (DIED). 3. NEETHU, D/O.G.SUGUNAN, 'ANUPAMA', PALLIKAL ROAD, THOPPUMPADY MURI, RAMESWARAM VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.R.ANILKUMAR FOR R1 THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. -------------------------------------------- C.R.P. NO. 1328 OF 2003 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of May, 2008 ORDER This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the decree holder/plaintiff challenging the order dated 24.10.2002 in E.A. No.43 of 2000 in E.P. No.134 of 1990 in O.S. No.185 of 1982 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Kochi. 2. The revision petitioner is the holder of a money decree. The contention of the revision petitioner is that as per the compromise decree, he is entitled to get interest at the rate of 12% per annum, but due to a clerical mistake interest is calculated at the rate of 6% per annum. In such circumstances, the decree holder seeks amendment of the execution petition by filing E.A. No.43 of 2000. The decree was passed on 15.3.1983. The application for amendment was filed on 22.2.2000. The trial court considered the question in detail and observed that the conduct of the petitioner has estopped him from making the request to alter the rate of interest in view of the subsequent developments, events and orders in the execution petitions as well as the order of this Court in an earlier Civil Revision Petition. The execution petitions were filed in the year 1986, 1988 and the present execution petition in the year 1990. The execution C.R.P.NO.1328/2003 2 court also noticed the fact that in the execution petition filed on 3.10.1988, the decree holder had submitted before the court that he does not propose to execute the decree any further and that in the balance statement filed by him he had claimed interest only at the rate of 6% per annum. In the revision filed by the respondents as C.R.P. No.1572 of 1993, the matter was finally settled and the respondents were directed to pay the balance amount in ten equal monthly instalments. Pursuant to the verdict of this Court, it is submitted that the entire amount was paid and the execution petition was closed. 3. There is no bona fides in filing an application for amendment of the execution petition at this distance of time. The execution court was right in observing that the decree holder was estopped from making such a request in view of the subsequent developments. In the above circumstances, I am no inclined to allow the prayer of the decree holder. The Civil Revision Petition is without any merit and it is accordingly dismissed. There will be no order as to costs. (HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE) sp/ C.R.P.NO.1328/2003 3 HAURN-UL-RASHID, J. C.R.P. NO. O R D E R 29th MAY, 2008