Venu vs Nandini Narayanan on 14 December, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 35858 of 2009(O)


1. VENU, S/O.LATE VELAYUDHAN, CARPENTER,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. KAVUKUTTY, W/O.LATE VELAYUDHAN,

                        Vs



1. NANDINI NARAYANAN, W/O.LATE NARAYANAN,
                       ...       Respondent

2. ROSHAN NARAYANAN, S/O.LATE NARAYANAN,

3. DEEPA NARAYANAN, D/O.LATE NARAYANAN,

4. DEEPTHI NARAYANAN, D/O.LATE NARAYANAN,

5. GOPALAN, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, BUSINESS,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.RENDEEP PREM

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

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

 Dated :14/12/2009

 O R D E R
                 S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J.
                ----------------------------------------
                  W.P.(C).No.35858 OF 2009
                    --------------------------------
        Dated this the 14th day of December 2009
        ----------------------------------------------------------

                             JUDGMENT

Challenge raised in the writ petition is against the

order passed by the execution court negativing the

objections raised by the petitioners/judgment debtors that

the decree executed based on a compromise is vitiated by

fraud. At the time of hearing, the learned counsel for the

petitioners submitted that in view of the proviso to Rule 3 of

Order 23 r/w Order 23 Rule 3A of the above order such a

challenge against the compromise decree can be raised only

before the court which passed that decree and not in

execution. Petitioners may be given an opportunity to move

a petition before the court which passed the decree and till

then, the execution of the decree may be stayed is the

submission of the counsel. Having regard to the

submissions made and taking note of the facts and

circumstances presented, I direct the execution court to

W.P.(C).No.35858 OF 2009 Page numbers

keep in abeyance the execution of the decree impugned,

based on the compromise decree, for a period of one week

from the date of this judgment. If any application is moved

by the petitioners challenging the compromise decree on the

trial side, it has to be disposed in accordance with law. Writ

petition is closed.

Hand over a copy of the judgment to the counsel

for the petitioner.

Sd/-

S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN,
JUDGE
//TRUE COPY//

P.A TO JUDGE

vdv