IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 21125 of 2009(O)
1. KUNJUKRISHNA PILLAI, S/O. KUNJU PILLAI
... Petitioner
2. P.M.VIKRAMAN, S/O. MADHAVAN,
Vs
1. MULAMOOTTIL LEASING AND HIGHER
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.A.SANIL KUMAR
For Respondent :SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEW
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN
Dated :25/08/2009
O R D E R
S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J.
-----------------------------
W.P.(C).No.21125 OF 2009
--------------------------
Dated this the 25th day of August 2009
-------------------------------------
JUDGMENT
The writ petition is filed seeking the
following reliefs.
i) To call for the records leading to
Ext.P3 order in E.P No. 19/2007 in O.S No.373/1999
of the Munsiff Court, Punalur and set aside the
same.
ii) To direct the Munsiff Court, Punalur
to reconsider E.P No.19/2007 in O.S No. 373/1999
and give an opportunity to the petitioners to
adduce evidence in the matter within a stipulated
time as directed by this Hon’ble Court.
W.P.(C).No.21125 OF 2009 Page numbers
iii) To direct the Additional Munsiff
Court, Punalur to grant atleast 20 installments to
pay the balance decree amount and till then Ext.P3
order issuing arrest warrant against the
petitioners in E.P No. 19/2007 in O.S No.373/1999
may be kept in abeyance.
iv) Issue such other reliefs as this
Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the
circumstances of the case.
2. Petitioners are the judgment debtors
in E.P No.19 of 2007 in O.S No.373 of 1999 on the
file of the Munsiff Court, Punalur. Decree in
execution was one for money. In execution of the
decree, pursuant to the steps taken by the decree
holder, warrant was ordered against the judgment
debtors / petitioners. Order passed by the
execution court directing issue of warrant vide
W.P.(C).No.21125 OF 2009 Page numbers
Ext.P3 order is challenged in the writ petition
invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with
this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India.
3. Notice being issued, the respondent /
decree holder has entered appearance. I heard the
counsel on both sides. The learned counsel for the
petitioners submitted that petitioners are prepared
to discharge the decree debt by instalments as
fixed by this court. It is further submitted, a
sum of Rs.6,000/- on the decree debt has already
been paid. Though the counsel for the decree
holder has some reservation in allowing
installments, having regard to the submissions made
and taking note of the facts and circumstances
presented, I find, judgment debtors can be allowed
to discharge the decree debt in ten equal monthly
instalments. Outstanding amount with interest and
W.P.(C).No.21125 OF 2009 Page numbers
cost, tentatively, calculated at Rs.35,000/-, and
the petitioners are directed to deposit Rs.3500/-
per month on or before 5th day of every month. In
case 5th of the month happens to be a holiday, the
instalment payment has to made in the next working
day positively. In default of payment of one
instalment, the decree holder shall be at liberty
to proceed for recovery of the entire outstanding
amount. Whatever be the outstanding amount due
after payment by nine instalments the rest of the
amount shall be paid in the last instalment by the
judgment debtor. Payment of installment will
commence from next month onwards. Subject to the
above directions, Ext.P3 order is quashed.
Sd/-
S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN,
JUDGE
//TRUE COPY//
P.A TO JUDGE
vdv