IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 28101 of 2009(O)
1. UNNI THANGAL, S/O.UNNITHANGAL,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. M/S.GOODWIN HIRE PURCHASE CHITS AND
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.N.SUBRAMANIAM
For Respondent :SRI.P.SANTHOSH (PODUVAL)
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH
Dated :06/07/2010
O R D E R
THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J.
--------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.28101 of 2009
--------------------------------------
Dated this the 6th day of July, 2010.
JUDGMENT
Ext.P2, sale proclamation is under challenge in this Writ Petition at
the instance of judgment debtor in E.P.No.47 of 2007 in O.S.No.878 of 2002 of
the court of learned Additional Sub Judge-II, Thrissur. Challenge is to the upset
price fixed in Ext.P2. According to the petitioner 54 cents referred to in Ex.P2
and attempted to be sold is valued at more than Rs.30 lakhs but the upset price
fixed in Ext.P2 is only Rs.1,66,819/-. Learned counsel for petitioner contends
that the upset price fixed is in violation of Rule 64 of Order 21 of the Code of Civil
Procedure (for short, “the Code”). Learned counsel for respondent/decree holder
contends that there is nothing on record to show that value of property is as
claimed by petitioner. Apart from raising a contention that property referred to in
Ext.P2 is valued at about Rs.30 lakhs petitioner has not taken out a commission
to assess value of property nor any other evidence is produced. As such I do not
consider it necessary to interfere with Ext.P2.
2. At this stage learned counsel for petitioner requested that petitioner
may be granted some time to pay the balance amount due under the decree. It
is stated that petitioner is prepared to pay the balance amount due. It is also
stated that pursuant to the order passed by this Court Rs.1,05,000/- has been
deposited by the petitioner in the executing court. I have heard learned counsel
WP(C) No.28101/2009
2
for respondent also in this regard. Learned counsel is agreeable to petitioner
being given a reasonable time to pay off the amount due under the decree. In
the circumstances stated I am inclined to permit petitioner to pay the balance
amount due under the decree in four equal monthly installments.
Resultantly this Writ Petition is disposed of in the following lines:
i. Petitioner is permitted to pay the balance amount due under
the decree in four equal monthly installments beginning from 02.08.2010
onwards.
ii. In case the amount due is not paid within the time granted
or, there is default in payment of any two installments it is open to the
respondent to proceed with execution of decree pursuant to Ext.P2.
iii. The amount if any deposited by petitioner in the executing
court can be withdrawn by respondent.
THOMAS P.JOSEPH,
Judge.
cks