IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 25TH JULY 2011 / 3RD SRAVANA 1933 CRP.No. 341 of 2011() ----------------------------- E.P.122/2011 IN OS.367/2006 OF MUNSIFF COURT, VAIKOM .................... REVN. PETITIONER/1ST JUDGMENT DEBTOR/1ST DEFENDANT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- R. BALAGOPAL, AGED 48, S/O.RAGHAVA PANICKER, "BHADRALAYAM", MURIYANKULANGARA, NADUVILE VILLAGE, VAIKKOM. BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR), SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH). RESPONDENTS/DECREE HOLDER AND JUDGMENT DEBTORS 3 TO 5/ PLAINTIFFS AND DEFENDANTS 2 TO 5 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. PAZHEMADAM FINANCE (P) LTD, VAIKKOM, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, E.K. LUKE, AGED 52, S/O.KURIAKOSE, PAZHAMADATHIL, VALLAKOM KARA, NADUVILE VILLAGE, VAIKKOM-686 141. 2. PAZHEMADAM FINANCE (P) LTD, VAIKKOM, REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR K.V. JOLLY, S/O.VARGHESE, KAREEMADATHIL, KIZHAKKEKARA, VADAYAR VILLAGE, VAIKKOM-686 141. 3. B. RAJAMMA, W/O.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, RAJAMANDIRAM, PADINJATTUMCHERI PADINJAREMURI, VAIKKOM-686 141. 4. SYAMALA DEVI, W/O.BABU, PADINJATTUMCHERI PADINJAREMURI, VAIKKOM, NOW RESIDING AT IRUMPANAM KARA, IRUMPAYAM VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK-686 141. 5. R. JAYACHANDRAN, S/O.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, RAJAMANDIRAM, PADINJATTUMCHERI, PADINJAREMURI, VAIKKOM-686 141. BY THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- C.R.P. No.341 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of July, 2011. ORDER Petitioner is the first judgment debtor/first defendant in E.P.No.122 of 2011 in O.S.No.367 of 2006 of the court of learned Munsiff, Vaikom. He is aggrieved by the order dated July 13, 2011 in E.P.No.122 of 2011 finding that he has means and issuing warrant of arrest for realization of the decree amount. Learned counsel submits that the suit was originally dismissed and a decree was passed in appeal which is under challenge in this Court in Second Appeal and the Second Appeal is coming up for hearing for admission this week itself. It is in the meantime the executing court found means for petitioner and issued warrant of arrest. 2. Learned counsel contends that finding of the executing court regarding means of the petitioner is not correct. 3. I have gone through the order under challenge and find that what was available before the executing court was the only evidence of representative of the respondent. Though he has cross examined, nothing could be brought out to discredit his version that petitioner has means. It is relevant to note that petitioner did not enter the witness box to give evidence on oath. Executing court on the evidence of representative of respondent found means of petitioner and ordered warrant. CRP No.341/2011 2 4. Since the Second Appeal pending in this Court is coming up for hearing for admission this week itself I am inclined to grant some relief to the petitioner but subject to conditions. Resultantly this Original Petition is disposed of in the following lines: i. Petitioner is permitted to request the executing court to permit him pay the amount in installments. If any such request is made, executing court shall decide that request after hearing counsel for respondent as well. ii. It is directed that execution of warrant of arrest against petitioner will stand in abeyance for a period of two weeks from this day or till this Court passes orders on the application for stay said to be preferred in the Second Appeal, whichever is earlier subject to condition that petitioner deposits in the executing court `20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) within a week from this day. iii. It is further directed that in case the said condition is violated and in the absence of any other legal impediment it is open to the executing court to proceed with personal execution against petitioner pursuant to the order under challenge, without any further enquiry regarding means. I.A.No.1714 of 2011 will stand dismissed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks