IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DECEMBER 2008 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 CRP.No. 749 of 2008 --------------------------------- E.P.53/2006 IN OS.358/2003 of MUNSIFF COURT, THIRUVALLA .................... REVN. PETITIONER/2ND JUDGMENT DEBTOR: K.C. CHACKO, KOTTAVEETTIL, KAVUNGUPRAYAR MURI, PURAMATTOM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.R.GIREESH VARMA RESPONDENT(S): DECREE HOLDER/JDs 1, 3-6.: 1. DAMODHARAN PILLAI ANIL KUMAR, SREERAMA SADANAM, KURIYANNOOR MURI, THOTTAPPUZHASSERI VILLAGE. 2. P.M. MATHEW, PUTHENPURACKAL VEEDU, PULLADU MURI, KOIPRAM VILLAGE. 3. PANKIAMMA SARASAMMA, ANTHALI MANNIL VEETTIL, PULLADU MURI, KOIPRAM VILLAGE. 4. SARATHCHANDRAN NAIR, DO. DO. 5. VISWAMBHARAN NAIR, DO. DO. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.P. Balachandran, J. -------------------------- C.R.P.No.749 of 2008 -------------------------- ORDER Though petitioner was directed, while granting interim stay for two months vide order 16.10.2008 on I.A.No.2282/08, to deposit an amount of Rs.8,000/- in the court below towards decree debt within one month from the date of order, there is no record produced to show that deposit was so made. Stay has also expired and there is no request made to extend the stay. 2. The relief sought for in this revision petition is to set aside the impugned order, whereby, warrant has been ordered by the execution court against the petitioner for realisation of the decree debt. The impugned order shows that considering the evidence of the decree holder as PW1 and the evidence adduced on the side of he judgment debtors as CPWs 1 and 2, the execution court got satisfied that judgment debtors 2 and 6 have got sufficient means to pay the decree debt CRP 749/08 2 claimed in the execution petition and they are purposefully evading payment. It was consequently that the execution court directed warrant to be issued against judgment debtors 2 and 6. Petitioner is the second judgment debtor. He has not been able to point out any infirmity in the impugned order passed by the court below. In the circumstances, I dismiss this revision petition. Court below shall be at liberty to proceed with personal execution against the petitioner/second judgment debtor. 17th December, 2008 (K.P.Balachandran, Judge) tkv