IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 18TH AUGUST 2009 / 27TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 15607 of 2009(O) --------------------------------------- EP 57/2008 IN OS.83/2008 of MUNSIFF COURT WAYANAD AT KALPETTA .................... PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- V.V. RAJENDRAN, S/O.VELUKUTTY, AGED 61 YEARS, THAZHAMUTTIL, MUTTIL P.O., VYTHERI, WAYANAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- THE CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK, KALPETTA, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. BY ADV. MR.K.ANAND, SMT.LATHA KRISHNAN . THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 15607/2009-O APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION FILED BY THE BANK. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE COUNTER STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE LEARNED MUNSIFF. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF ASSETS FILED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, KALPETTA. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.15607 of 2009 - O --------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: “i) To issue a writ of certiorari, calling for the records relating to Exhibit P6 and quash the original of the same. ii) To declare that the petitioner has no means to make payment of the decree amount and order of arrest cannot be passed against him.” 2. Petitioner is the judgment debtor in E.P.No.57 of 2008 in O.S.No.83 of 2008 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Kalpetta. Resisting the execution of the decree passed against him, petitioner raised a plea of no means. Learned Munsiff found no merit in the plea so canvased, and rejecting that plea warrant was ordered to be issued against him. Propriety and correctness of that order is challenged in the writ petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 3. I heard the learned counsel on both sides. 4. No evidence was adduced by the decree holder despite the plea of no means canvassed by the judgment debtor and so much so, the order passed by the learned Munsiff is unsustainable under law, is the submission of the learned counsel for the W.P.(C).No.15607 of 2009 - O 2 petitioner. Ext.P4 is the copy of the objection filed by the judgment debtor raising plea of no means resisting the decree executed against him. It is seen from Ext.P4 objection that petitioner retired from service as Deputy Labour Officer and as a pensioner, even on his admission, he is getting Rs.5,897/- per month. The question emerging for consideration is whether the plea of no means take within its ambit, plea of insufficient means to discharge the debt. As a pensioner, he is getting nearly Rs.6,000/- is proved by the objections filed by the judgment debtor himself. Plea of no means contemplates lack of means for sustenance in life and thereby the discharge of decree debt. It cannot be equated with lack of sufficient means to discharge the decree debt. So, on the admission of the judgment debtor itself, it is seen, his plea of no means cannot be countenanced under law. No impropriety can be attached to the order passed by the learned Munsiff repelling his objections and ordering for issue of warrant against him. Writ petition lacks in merit, and it is dismissed. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. bkn/-