IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 31ST MAY 2010 / 10TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 10381 of 2010(O) -------------------------- EP.43/2008 IN ARC 1080/2007 of SUB COURT, KOILANDY .................... PETITIONER(S): JUDGMENT DEBTORS 1 AND 2 --------------------------------------- 1. GOPALAN, S/O. KANNALAN, NIDUMPILAVIL, MUIPONDH AMSOM DESOM, KOILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. SHIJI, D/O. GOPALAN, NIDUMPILAVIL, MUIPONDH AMSOM DESOM, KOILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.B.ARUNKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): DECREE HOLDER ---------------------------- THE SECRETARY, CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY, MEPPAYYUR, KOILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.K.LAKSHMINARAYANAN SMT.SATHYA SHREEPRIYA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO.10381/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE EP NO.43/2008 ON THE FILE OF SUB COURT, KOYILANDY EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE DRAFT NOTIFICATION OF SALE IN EP NO.43/2008 ON THE FILE OF SUB COURT, KOYILANDY //TRUE COPY// THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.10381 of 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of May, 2010. JUDGMENT What is under challenge in this Writ Petition at the instance of petitioners/judgment debtors in E.P.No.43 of 2008 in A.R.C.No.1080 of 2007 being executed in the court of learned Sub Judge, Koilandy is Ext.P2, draft proclamation schedule filed by respondent/decree holder to bring property of petitioners for sale. According to the learned counsel for petitioners Ext.P2 is invalid. But I do not find reason to interfere with Ext.P2 since it is only a draft proclamation schedule and issuance of direction for amendment of proclamation schedule is within the power of executing court. 2. At this stage learned counsel for petitioners requested that petitioners may be permitted to pay the amount due under the decree within ten months. According to the learned counsel, of the amount due under the decree after payments already effected, balance amount payable is only Rs.2,57,000/-. But this statement is contested by learned counsel for respondent. Anyway, it is not necessary for me to go into the question regarding the balance amount due under the decree. What exactly is the amount due under the decree and payable by petitioners is to be decided by the executing court, in case of dispute, with reference to the materials before it. WP(C) No.10381/2010 2 3. So far as request for time of payment is concerned, I have heard learned counsel for respondent also. Having regard to the difficulties expressed by learned counsel on behalf of petitioners I am inclined to grant petitioners time to pay the amount due under the decree. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. But petitioners are permitted to pay the amount due under the decree in nine (9) monthly installments beginning from 01.07.2010. It is made clear that in case any two installments are defaulted, it will be open to respondent to proceed with execution pursuant to Ext.P2, draft proclamation schedule. If the property has already been proclaimed for sale petitioners shall file affidavit in the executing court before 10.06.2010 waiving fresh proclamation failing which also execution proceedings can continue. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks