##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S.

WEDNESDAY, THE 16^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 / 25TH BHADRA, 1948 OP(C) NO. 2384 OF 2026 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED IN EP 22/2017 IN OS NO.87 OF

2011 OF ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT/I ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM PETITIONER:

SHELLEY AUGUSTINE AGED 59 YEARS S/O. AUGUSTINE, KOCHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, PARAMBA POST, PARAPPA (VIA) KASARAGOD DISTRICT PRESENTLY RESIDING AT OASIS TEX NJARALLOOR, KIZHAKKAMBALAM POST, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 671533 BY ADVS.

SRI.T.MADHU SMT.C.R.SARADAMANI SHRI.RENJISH S. MENON SMT.AVANTHIKA R.

SHRI.KARTHIK KRISHNA M.

SMT.APARNA K. P.

RESPONDENTS:

1 MUHAMMED KOYA @ C.K SHEHEEN AGED 61 YEARS RESIDING AT CK MANZIL,VAZHAKKALA, KAKKANAD WEST POST, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682030

2 THE MANAGER FEDERAL BANK LIMITED, VYTTILA BRANCH, VYTTILA P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682019 BY ADVS.

SHRI.PETER THARAKAN SRI.FRANCIS PETER THARAKAN THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON

16.09.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

EASWARAN S., J .

------------------------------------

O.P.(C) No.2384 of 2026 -------------------------------------

Dated this the 16th day of September, 2026

JUDGMENT

This original petition is filed by the decree holder questioning the laches on the part of the court as well as on the part of the garnishee in not depositing the amount ordered at the trial stage. The fact discloses that the suit was filed for realisation of Rs.1,77,000/- and the suit was decreed on 19.03.2015. Pending the suit, the property mortgaged with the second respondent - Bank was attached. The attachment order was communicated to the second respondent bank as evident from Ext.P3 order dated 17.02.2012. After the decree was passed, the petitioner lodged the execution proceedings, wherein he wanted the garnishee to deposit the amount which is ordered to be kept aside as per the order of attachment dated 17.02.2012. The garnishee entered appearance and filed an affidavit stating the surplus amount was already deposited in two cases in 2013 and 2014 and nothing remains and accordingly, on 21.03.2019, by Ext.P6 order, the matter was closed. The petitioner filed a review petition. The review petition was dismissed by the Ist Additional Sub Court by Ext.P9 which is impugned in the present original petition.

2. Heard Sri.T.Madhu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Peter Tharakan, learned counsel for the respondent Bank.

3. The question to be considered is whether the second respondent bank can plea discharge as done before the trial court. The defence raised by the second respondent Bank is that there are two other proceedings in O.S.No.281 of 2010 and yet another which was not disclosed before this Court in the counter affidavit. The second respondent further states that the property mortgaged with them was sold in auction for a sum of Rs.6,50,000/- was deposited on 27.05.2013 in E.A.No.876 of 2012 in E.P.No.283 of 2012 in O.S.No.281 of 2010 and as per another order in E.A.No.877 of 2012 in E.P.No.283 of 2012 in O.S.No.281 of 2010. This comes to Rs.50,674/- and therefore, nothing remains with them. The second respondent further disputed having received any notice with regard to the proceedings in respect of the present suit. Therefore, the contention of the second respondent is that it is not liable to make good for the order of garnishee.

4. In the light of the specific denial on behalf of the second respondent, this Court called for a report from the Ist Additional Sub Court, Ernakulam as to whether order dated 31.01.2012 in I.A.No.84 of 2012 in O.S.No.87 of 2011 was served on the second respondent bank. The report forwarded by the court dated 08.09.2026 shows that the Federal Bank Ltd, Vyttila, Ernakulam has received the notice regarding the attachment on 17.02.2012. With this material point, when this Court proceeds to consider the rival contentions of the parties, it is evident that there is a total