SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 5157

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, J
ABOOBACKER – Appellant
Versus
PERDALA SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK – Respondent
OP(C) NO. 2908 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: R.ANAS MUHAMMED SHAMNAD, T.U.SUJITH KUMAR, SARUN RAJAN, HAMDAN MANSOOR K., SALEEK.C.A.
For the Respondents: T.MADHU, C.R.SARADAMANI, RENJISH S. MENON, AVANTHIKA R., KARTHIK KRISHNA M., ARUNIMA A.R., T.S.DAVIS

Court allows installment repayment of decree debt acknowledging mutual consent while securing creditor's right to execute in case of default.

Headnote:Statute Analysis: The case pertains to the execution of an award in A.R.C No. 1163 of 2018. Facts of the Case: Petitioners are judgment debtors who challenged the upset price fixed by the execution court and sought to rectify the earlier order that set the price at interceding levels.

Findings of Court:
The court allowed the petitioners to repay the decree debt in installments after both parties agreed.

Issues: The key question centered on payment terms for the decree debt.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's rationale was to facilitate repayment considering the submitted installment plan jointly proposed by both parties.

Result: The original petition is disposed of permitting the petitioners to pay the decree debt along with accrued interest in fifteen equal monthly installments commencing from 15.02.2026.

Table of Content
1. petitioners are challenging upset price set by the execution court. (Para 1)
2. both sides agreed to installment repayments for the debt. (Para 2 , 3 , 4)

JUDGMENT

The petitioners are the judgment debtors in E.P No.70 of 2023 on the files of the Sub Court, Kasaragod. The respondent/decree holder filed execution petition to execute the award in A.R.C No.1163 of 2018. By Ext.P8 order, the execution court fixed the upset price for the schedule property at Rs.20 Lakhs. The same was challenged by the petitioners before this Court and this Court by Ext.P9 judgment, set aside Ext.P8 and remitted the matter for reconsideration. Pursuant to Ext.P9, the execution court passed Ext.P10 whereby, the upset price is fixed as Rs.24 Lakhs. Challenging Ext.P10, this original petition is filed.

2. When the original petition came up for consideration on 23.01.2026, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent Society that the respondent is willing to show indulgence to the petitioners by granting installment facility.

3. When the matter came up for further consideration today, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are willing to pay the entire decree debt with accrued interest in fifteen equal monthly installments.

4. The learned counsel for the respondent Society submits that they have no objection in permitting the petitioners to pay the decree debt along with accrued interest in fifteen equal monthly installments.

In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, this original petition is disposed of permitting the petitioners to pay the decree debt along with accrued interest in fifteen equal monthly installments commencing from 15.02.2026. In case the petitioners default payment of any of the installments as aforesaid, it will be open to the execution court to proceed with the execution pursuant to Ext.P10.

It will also be open to the petitioners to approach the Society for the benefit of One Time Settlement.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top