IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
CRP No. 575 of 2007()
1. JSOSSY ABRAHAM, AGED 50,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. ROBIN ABRAHAM, AGED 54 ,
... Respondent
2. THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER, TRIVANDRUM.
3. BABY JOSEPH,
For Petitioner :SRI.CHITTOOR RAJAMANNAR
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN
Dated :28/06/2007
O R D E R
M.N.KRISHNAN, J.
-----------------------------
C.R.P.No.575 OF 2007 C
-----------------------------
Dated this the 28th June, 2007.
O R D E R
This revision petition is preferred against the order
in E.A.69/05 in E.P.31/03 in O.S.95/01 of the Subordinate
Judge’s Court, Thodupuzha. The petition is filed by the
judgment debtor to consider the question as to the
jurisdiction of the court to execute the decree on the
ground of fraud, grave violations of procedures and other
connected matters. I have taken a decision in other
C.R.P’s, 527/07 and 528/07 to the effect that when a person
wants to challenge a decree on the ground of fraud, it is
only a voidable decree and it has to be set aside by
methods known to law and the execution court can go into
that question. So, the said submission cannot be accepted.
Now, learned counsel for the revision petitioner submits
that the decree is not in consonance with the judgment and
it is liable to be interfered with. The judgment and
decree of the court has been taken up in appeal and it
reached up to the Apex Court and it has been confirmed. So
what is put into execution is the decree which is confirmed
by the Apex Court and the executing court cannot go beyond
the terms of the decree and therefore such a question
cannot be considered at this stage. For these reasons I
C.R.P. 575/07 2
find no reason to interfere with the decision rendered by
the executing court. Therefore C.R.P is dismissed.
M.N.KRISHNAN
Judge
jj