High Court Kerala High Court

T.P.Rasheed vs K.V.Michael on 30 November, 2009

Kerala High Court
T.P.Rasheed vs K.V.Michael on 30 November, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 25695 of 2009(O)


1. T.P.RASHEED, MANITHUNGAL HOUSE,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. K.V.MICHAEL, KUZHIPPALLIL HOUSE,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.J.MICHAEL

                For Respondent  :SRI.UNNIKRISHNAN.V.ALAPATT

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN

 Dated :30/11/2009

 O R D E R
              S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J.
                  -------------------------------
              W.P.(C).NO.25695 OF 2009 ()
                -----------------------------------
      Dated this the 30th day of November, 2009

                      J U D G M E N T

Petitioner is the judgment debtor in E.P.No.62 of 2008 in

O.S.No.49 of 1998 on the file of the Munsiff Court,

Thoudpuzha. Respondent is the decree holder. Decree

executed was passed in a suit for money. Negativing the

objections canvassed by the petitioner/judgment debtor that

he has no means, warrant was ordered against him. Ext.P3 is

the copy of that order. Propriety and correctness of that order

is challenged in the writ petition invoking the supervisory

jurisdiction vested with this Court under Article 227 of the

Constitution of India.

2. I heard the counsel on both sides. The learned

counsel for the petitioner/judgment debtor sought indulgence

of this Court for an opportunity to lead evidence to

substantiate his case that he has no means. It is submitted

WPC.25695/09 2

that pursuant to the direction given by this Court, he has

remitted a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards the decree debt.

Perusing Ext.P3 order, it is seen that the decree holder alone

gave evidence in the proceedings and there was no evidence

by the judgment debtor. According to the learned counsel for

the petitioner, he was not provided with an opportunity to lead

evidence, which, however, is disputed by the learned counsel

for the respondent/decree holder. Having regard to the

submissions made and taking note of the facts and

circumstances presented, I find an opportunity can be

extended to the judgment debtor to lead evidence subject to

the condition of his depositing an amount of Rs.15,000/-

(Rupees fifteen thousand only) within a period of one month

towards the decree debt. The deposit, if any, made by the

judgment debtor pursuant to orders given by this Court, will

not be given any weight in considering the plea of no means

canvassed by him. In case, the deposit is made within the

time limit fixed, the court below shall provide an opportunity

to the petitioner to lead evidence to substantiate his plea of

means. Whatever deposit made by the judgment debtor shall

WPC.25695/09 3

be released to the decree holder. The execution court is

directed to dispose the proceedings as expeditiously as

possible. In case the deposit is not made within the time fixed,

the court below shall proceed with the execution of warrant.

Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed.

S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN
JUDGE

prp