B.N. Patnaik, J.

The defendants in O.S. No. 24 of 1991 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Attingal, have preferred this revision against the order dated 18.12.1995 in E.P. 87/93 arising out of the said suit. By the impugned order, the learned Sub-Judge ordered execution of the decree by arrest and detention of the 2nd petitioner herein.

2. Plaintiff-respondent filed the suit against the petitioners' for realisation of a sum

of Rs. 60,000/- with interest, which was advanced to the defendants in 1985. The second defendant (judgment debtor (2nd petitioner herein) had executed a demand promissory note and also hypothecated the plaint schedule properties consisting of two items as society. The trial court passed the decree on 16-11-1992 for recovery of an amount of Rs. 86,182.77 with future interest and cost. The decree which is a composite one reads' as follows:

"For the reasons stated in the judgment, plaintiff is allowed to realise Rs. 86,182.77 (Rupee Eighty six thousand One hundred and Eighty two and seventy seven paise) with interest at the rate of 13% per annum with quarterly rests and costs of the suit from the defendants and from their properties and by sale of pl