High Court Kerala High Court

V.K.Mohammed vs T.K.Humyoon on 18 August, 2010

Kerala High Court
V.K.Mohammed vs T.K.Humyoon on 18 August, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

CRP.No. 441 of 2010()



1. V.K.MOHAMMED
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. T.K.HUMYOON
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.RAMKUMAR NAMBIAR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH

 Dated :18/08/2010

 O R D E R
                   THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J.
           ====================================
                     C.R.P. No.441 of 2010
           ====================================
           Dated this the 18th  day of August, 2010


                           O R D E R

Judgment debtor in E.P.No.165 of 2007 in O.S. No.283 of

1995 of the court of learned Principal Sub Judge, Thalassery is the

petitioner before me challenging order dated 06.08.2010 finding

means for petitioner and issuing warrant for his arrest for non-

payment of decree amount. Learned counsel contends that there

is no acceptable evidence regarding means of petitioner and that

on two prior occasions execution petition was dismissed on

account of failure of respondent to prove means of petitioner.

2. Petitioner has suffered a decree for payment of money

to the respondent. The latter sought personal execution and his

Power of Attorney has given evidence as P.W.1. Exhibit A1 is an

information obtained from the office of District Lottery Officer,

Kozhikode pursuant to a query under the Right to Information Act

as to the business of petitioner. Exhibit C1 is the report of

Advocate Commissioner. Petitioner gave evidence as R.W.1 and

proved Ext.B1 series. Exhibit B1 series are produced to show that

C.R.P. No.441 of 2010
-: 2 :-

building where petitioner is allegedly doing business is demised in

favour of his son.

3. It is seen from Ext.A1 that petitioner is engaged in

wholesale lottery business at various places in Kannur town. It is

also revealed that for the period from 12.11.2007 to 12.11.2008

he deposited Rs.60 lakhs and for the period from 21.06.2008 to

20.06.2009, Rs.40 lakhs as security with the District Lottery

Officer. It is also revealed that he purchased lottery tickets in

August, 2008 for Rs.5,95,019 and got Rs.2,56,086/- by way of

commission. Advocate Commissioner has reported about the

places where petitioner is conducting wholesale lottery business

in Kannur town. Petitioner when examined as R.W.1 stated that he

was conducting VeeKay Lottery Agencies at Kannur and that he

was its wholesale agent. He also admitted that he had three

lottery stalls in Kannur town. In the light of that evidence court

below found that petitioner has sufficient means to discharge the

decree debt. It is not disputed that amount due under the

decree has not been paid. Hence the finding entered by the court

below that petitioner is having sufficient means requires no

interference.

4. Learned counsel at this stage made a fervent plea

C.R.P. No.441 of 2010
-: 3 :-

that petitioner may be permitted to pay the amount due under

the decree in installments. But I am not inclined to accept that

request since evidence of petitioner shows that he is sufficiently

affluent to discharge the decree debt. Having regard to facts and

circumstances of the case and to enable petitioner discharge

liability, one month’s time can be given to him. I am also inclined

to direct that warrant of arrest shall be kept in abeyance for the

said period.

Resultantly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. But petitioner is

granted one month’s time from this day to discharge the decree

debt. Warrant of arrest issued against petitioner shall remain in

abeyance for the said period. In case the entire liability is not

discharged within the above said period it is open to the execution

court to proceed with execution without any further enquiry as to

the means of petitioner.

THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE.

vsv