HIGH COURT OF KERALA
THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J
KUTTAN – Appellant
Versus
VALLANGHY-VITHINASSERY SER CO OPERATIVE – Respondent
OP (CIVIL) 618/2011
Execution - Petition for Recall - Order Execution Proceedings - Court's Discretion - Allowed Installment Payments
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a judgment debtor, was subject to arrest for non-payment of a large monetary award. After partial payments were made, a request to recall the warrant was filed but dismissed. The petitioner sought permission to pay the balance in installments.
Finding of the Court:
The court found merit in allowing the petitioner to pay the amount due in installments, recognizing previous payments and the petitioner's stated difficulties while also ensuring that the respondent's financial obligations were met.
Issues: Whether the court should recall the warrant of arrest and permit installment payments of the remaining debt.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that allowing installment payments was appropriate given the circumstances, emphasizing that failure to comply could lead to immediate execution without further inquiry.
Final Decision: Petitioner permitted to pay the remaining balance in 10 equal installments with conditions.
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner is the judgment debtor in E.P. No.152 of 2009 of the court of learned Sub Judge, Palakkad where the award in ARC No.290 of 2006 is being executed. The amount claimed by the respondent is Rupees Twenty five lakhs and odd. On a finding that petitioner, in spite of having sufficient means refused to pay the amount, warrant of arrest was issued to him. Petitioner filed E.A. No.20 of 2011 to recall the warrant. A sum of Rupees Three lakhs was paid on 27.12.2010. Executing Court, however declined to recall the warrant and dismissed E.A.No.20 of 2011 as per Ext.P9, order dated January 10, 2011. That order is under challenge.
2. Petitioner submitted that even before filing of the execution petition he has paid Rs.7,50,000/- (Seven lakhs and fifty thousand only) to the respondent and as per order of this Court a further sum of Rs.3,50,000/- (Rupees Three lakhs has also been paid leaving the balance payable to the respondent as Rupees Fifteen lakhs. Learned counsel submitted that petitioner may be permitted to pay the balance amount due in 10 (ten) equal monthly installments.
3. Learned counsel for respondent while responding to the request made by petitioner argued that if this Court is inclined to give time petitioner may be directed to discharge the entire liability including interest in six installments. It is submitted that respondent is a Society of Farmers and it has to pay the amount to the farmers for purchasing paddy from them. Having regard to the difficulties of petitioner stated by learned counsel and considering the fact that some amount amount has already been paid, I am inclined to permit petitioner pay the entire balance amount due in 10 (ten) equal monthly installments but subject to conditions.
Resultantly, Original Petition is disposed of in the following lines:
(a) Petitioner is permitted to pay the entire balance amount due (with interest and costs if any) in 10 (ten) equal monthly installments beginning from 01.09.2011 provided by the last installment entire amount due is paid.
(b) The amount shall be paid to the respondent under proper receipt to be produced in court and recorded as provided under law or deposited in the executing court for payment to the respondent on or before the 5th of every calender month. In case the 5th of a month happens to be a holiday, payment/deposit shall be made on the next working day.
(c) It is directed that in case there is default in payment of any two installments it will be open to the executing court to proceed with execution pursuant to the finding regarding means without any further enquiry regarding means. (d) As and when amount is deposited in the executing court, respondent can withdraw the same.
(e) Warrant of arrest issued to the petitioner will stand in abeyance for a period of 10 (ten) months from 01.09.2011 or till default as stated in clause (c) is committed, whichever is earlier.
THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE.
vsv
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.