IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 16TH AUGUST 2011 / 25TH SRAVANA 1933 OP(C).No. 2697 of 2011(O) ---------------------------------- E.P. NO.22/2011 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, KOTTAYAM. .......... PETITIONER (S): ----------------------- AJEESH K.PRASAD, S/O.SIVAPRASAD, AJEESH BHAVAN, S.H.MOUNT P.O., NATTASSERRY BHAGAM, PERUMBAIKKADU VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.P.MADHAVANKUTTY RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- MUTHOOT VEHICLE AND ASSET FINANCE LTD., MUTHOOT CHAMBERS, KURIAN TOWERS, BANERJI ROAD, ERNAKULAM , REPESENTED BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER & BUSINESS EXECUTIVE, GIRISHMON N.K., S/O. KRISHNANKUTTY, NEDUMKALAYIL, POOVANTHURUTHU P.O., PANACHIKADU VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT PIN 686 001. THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss OP(C) NO.2697/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE E.P. 22/2011 BEFORE THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, KOTTAYAM P2:- COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 16.6.2011 IN EP. 22/2011 BEFORE THE ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, KOTTAYAM. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL:- TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- O.P(C).No.2697of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this 16th day of August, 2011 JUDGMENT First judgment debtor in E.P.No.22 of 2011 of the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Kottayam where an award in Ref.No.63 of 2009 is being executed, is the petitioner before me challenging Ext.P2, order dated June 16, 2011 issuing warrant of arrest to the petitioner. Learned counsel submitted that petitioner did not get opportunity to adduce evidence and cross examine PW1 who gave evidence regarding means of petitioner on behalf of the respondent. 2. I have gone through the order under challenge and find that the evidence of PW1 regarding means of petitioner was not challenged. I do not find reason to think that the court below has refused an opportunity to cross examine PW1 and an opportunity to adduce evidence on the side of petitioner. I therefore do not find reason to interfere with the order. 3. However, I am inclined to give an opportunity to the petitioner to request the learned Additional District Judge grant facility for payment of the amount due in installments but, subject to condition. O.P(C).No.2697of 2011 -: 2 :- Resultantly this original petition is dismissed. But the following directions are issued: (i) It is directed that warrant of arrest issued to the petitioner pursuant to Ext.P2, order will stand in abeyance for a period of one month from this day on condition that petitioner deposited in the executing court for payment to the respondent `.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) within three weeks from this day. (ii) In case the said condition is not complied it is open to the executing court to proceed with execution pursuant to Ext.P2, order. (iii) Petitioner is permitted to request the executing court to grant permission to pay the amount in installments and if any such request is made the executing court shall decide that request after hearing counsel for respondent also. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-