IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 32076 of 2005(R)
1. N.K. RAVEENDRAN, S/O. GOPALAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. SREE GOKULAM CHIT &
... Respondent
2. A. CHANDRAN, S/O. CHATHU,
For Petitioner :SRI.M.SASINDRAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
Dated :12/06/2007
O R D E R
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J.
-------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 32076 OF 2005
-----------------------------------
Dated this the 12th day of June, 2007
JUDGMENT
In a proceeding for execution of award by the Registrar under the
Chit Funds Act before the Munsiff’s Court, Thalassery, the petitioner-
judgment debtor contended that the Execution Petition is not
maintainable. The contention was repelled by the court. The argument
of the petitioner was that the award and the non-satisfaction certificate
which were conveyed in the form of a letter by the Registrar cannot be
treated as a decree in a civil court. The issue in my view is covered
against the petitioner by judgment in Krishnamoorthy v. Khaled
Rahman [1996 (2) KLT 788]. The challenge against Ext.P3 fails and
the Writ Petition will stand dismissed. However, the petitioner is
permitted to raise other contentions, if any, to the personal execution
sought against him. If additional objections are filed by the petitioner
before the court below within three weeks from today, the learned
Munsiff will look into the same and will conduct an enquiry and only after
such enquiry will issue process for arresting and detaining the petitioner.
In the mean while the petitioner is directed to remit every month
commencing from 15.7.07 at the rate of Rs.2,500/- towards the decree
WPC No.32076 of 2005
2
debt without fail. i.e. till such time as orders are passed after enquiry in
to the petitioner’s objection to the execution.
The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. No costs.
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE
btt
WPC No.32076 of 2005
3