IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 20TH MAGHA 1932 OP(C).No. 278 of 2011(O) E.P.NO.33/2010 IN O.S.NO.123/2009 OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, CHANGANACHERRY. PETITIONERS/JUDGEMENT DEBTORS 1 AND 2: ----------------------------------------------- 1. RATHEESH K.R., VADAKKETHIL, KOTTUMURI POST, CHANGANACHERRY. 2. BAIJU P.S., LAIJU BHAVANAM, PULLIMALA, THIRUVALLA. BY ADV. SRI.M.R.SARIN PANICKER RESPONDENTS: DECREE HOLDER ---------------------------- 1. MANAGER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE BRANCH, CHANGANACHERRY-686 101. 2. OMANAKUTTAN V.S., VALIYA VADAKKETHIL VEETTIL, THRIKKODITHANAM VILLAGE, THRIKKODITHANAM-686 112. R1 BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI.K.S.DILEEP THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF E.P.NO.33/10 IN O.S.NO.123/09 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, CHANGANACHERRY. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE UNDER RULE 22 ISSUED TO THE SECOND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// AHZ/ K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ O.P.(C). NO. 278 OF 2011 O ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 9th day of February, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioners are judgment debtors 1 and 2 in E.P.No.33 of 2010 in O.S.No.123 of 2009, on the file of the Court of the Munsiff of Changanacherry. The Execution Petition was filed for realization of the decree amount by arrest and detention of the petitioners. The court below issued an arrest warrant against the petitioners. When the Original Petition came up for admission on 20.1.2011, the following order was passed: “Admit. Counsel takes notice for the first respondent. It is not necessary to issue notice to the second respondent as he will not be affected by any order passed in this Original Petition. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the first petitioner was arrested and he was sent to jail in execution of the decree. The counsel submitted that the petitioners are prepared to pay the decree amount in instalments. O.P.(C) NO.278 OF 2011 :: 2 :: 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that ` 10,000/- can be deposited immediately. Another ` 40,000/- will be deposited within a month and the entire balance amount will be deposited within a month thereafter. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the first respondent Bank submitted that if the petitioners pay the amount within a reasonable time, the Bank has no objection in releasing the first petitioner from jail for the time being. Accordingly, there will be an interim order directing the court below to order release of the first petitioner from jail on condition that the first petitioner deposits a sum of ` 10,000/-. On such release, the first petitioner shall execute a bond before the court below undertaking to appear as and when directed.” 2. It is submitted by the counsel appearing on either side that a sum of ` 20,000/- was paid by the first petitioner instead of `10,000/-. Learned counsel appearing for the first respondent Bank submitted that after deducting the aforesaid ` 20,000/-, the balance payable will come to ` 65,000/-. O.P.(C) NO.278 OF 2011 :: 3 :: In view of the undertaking made by the petitioners and recorded in the order dated 20.1.2011, the Original Petition is disposed of as follows: a) The petitioners shall deposit before the executing court for payment to the decree holder or pay directly to the decree holder a sum of ` 35,000/- on or before 4.3.2011. b) The balance decree amount shall be paid or deposited for payment to the decree holder on or before 5.4.2011. c) If the petitioners commit default in payment of any of the instalments, the execution proceedings shall continue against the petitioners forthwith. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/