IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 30668 of 2008(A)
1. R.MURALIDHARAN, S/O.N.RAMAKRISHNAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THATHAMANGALAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.P.BALACHANDRAN
Dated :17/11/2008
O R D E R
K.P. Balachandran, J.
--------------------------
W.P.(C)No.30668 of 2008 A
--------------------------
JUDGMENT
Petitioner, who is the judgment debtor in E.P.
No.132/07 pending on the file of the Sub Court,
Palakkad, has sought to get set aside the order
dated 18.9.2008 in the said EP. Order dated
18.9.2008 reads thus:
“Today no payment. Repeat arrest
warrant to the respondent.”
From the above order, it can be understood that
warrant had been issued earlier and some payments
were made and it is for reason of not making any
payment on subsequent posting date that arrest
warrant was ordered to be repeated.
2. It is contended before me by the learned
counsel for the petitioner that even while ordering
warrant in the first instance, there was no order
passed by the execution court pursuant to the
WPC 30668/08 2
objection of the petitioner regarding no means.
According to him, no order issuing warrant could
have been passed without an order entering a
finding in favour of the petitioner/judgment debtor
regarding his means. The records produced along
with this writ petition show that on 11.8.2006, the
petitioner has deposited Rs.80,000/- in
Thathamangalam Service Co-operative Bank, which is
the decree holder bank; that thereafter on
3.9.2008, just after three weeks, he has made a
deposit of another Rs.24,000/- and that on the very
next day, namely on 4.9.2008, he made two deposits
respectively of Rs.20,000/- and Rs.10,000/- and
those are evidenced by Exhibit P4 series photostat
copies of receipts. These itself would show that he
is one who is having means. If at all there is any
serious contention raised by the petitioner that at
present he has no means, viz., after 4.9.2008 or
even earlier to those deposits, he should have
stated the reasons as to why Exhibit P4 series do
WPC 30668/08 3
not evidence his financial affluence and why he
contends that he is having no means to discharge
the balance debt. If at all the petitioner files
objection before the execution court explaining all
these, the court may enter a finding as regards
his means before issuing warrant. Till such an
objection is filed, petitioner is not entitled to
any relief. If such a detailed objection is filed
and that appears to have any merit on the
application of the petitioner, the execution court
may withdraw the warrant and conduct an enquiry
into the plea of “no means” and pass appropriate
orders. Till then, warrant cannot be kept in
abeyance or the impugned order cannot be set aside.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
17th November, 2008 (K.P.Balachandran, Judge)
tkv