Balakrishnan v. K.K.Prakash
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/6TH PHALGUNA, 1936 OP(C).No. 2139 of 2014 (O) ------------------------------- (O.S.113/2007 OF SUB COURT, THIRUVALLA) PETITIONER:
-------------- BALAKRISHNAN MANIMANGALATH VEEDU, MATHILBHAGOM MURI, THIRUVALLA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.S.SIVA KUMAR SRI.C.B.SREEKUMAR SRI.P.G.PRESANNAKUMAR RESPONDENTS:
-----------------
1. K.K.PRAKASH S/O.KRISHNAN, KOCHUPARAMBIL VEEDU, NADUVILEMURI NEDUMBRAM VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA TALUK, PIN689 101.
2. M P MADHAVI W/O.BALAKRISHNAN, MANIMANGALATH VEEDU MATHILBHAGOM MURI, THIRUVALLA VILLAGE, PIN-689101.
3. ANIL S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, MANIMANGALATH VEEDU MATHILBHAGOM MURI, THIRUVALLA VILLAGE, PIN-689101
4. VASANTHI D/O.BALARKRISHNAN, MANIMANGALATH VEEDU MATHILBHAGOM MURI, THIRUVALLA VILLAGE, PIN-689101
5. RAJANI D/O.BALAKRISHNAN, MANIMANGALATH VEEDU MATHILBHAGOM MURI, THIRUVALLA VILLAGE, PIN-689101. R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.HARIDAS R1 BY ADV. SMT.S.SIKKY THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP(C).No. 2139 of 2014 (O) ------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
--------------------------- P1:- COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION NUMBERED AS E.P NO.20 OF 2012 IN OS NO.113 OF 2007 PENDING ON THE FILES OF THE SUB COURT, THIRUVALLA.
P2:- COPY OF THE RECEIPT DTD 19/8/2014 FOR A SUM OF RS.3,50,000/- ISSUED BY THE SHERISTADAR.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:
----------------------------- EXT. R1(a) COPY OF COMPROMISE PETITION FILED IN O.S.113/2007 DTD. 14.7.09.
EXT. R1(b) COPY OF JUDGMENT RECORDING COMPROMISE DECREE IN O.S.113/2007 DTD. 15.7.09.
EXT. R1(c) COPY OF COMPROMISE PETITION IN O.S.1/2010 DTD. 29.3.11. EXT. R1(d) COPY OF COMPROMISE DECREE IN O.S.1/2010 DTD.30.3.11. // True Copy // P.A. to Judge.
smp
P.BHAVADASAN, J.
------------------------------------------------- Original Petition (Civil) No.2139 OF 2014 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of February, 2015.
J U D G M E N T
A litigation which began in the year 2007 is still pending with no end in sight in the near future.
2. The petitioner seems to have transferred his property to the 1st respondent herein and later litigation began between the two in respect of the property and two suits have been filed, one by the petitioner for injunction and the other by the 1st respondent for eviction. The suit filed by the 1st respondent was compromised and the compromise is referred to in Ext.R1(a). The said compromise was not honoured. That gave rise to another suit as O.S.No.1/2010 challenging the compromise decree. To the good fortune of the petitioner herein, that suit was also compromised i.e. Ext.R1(c). Ext.R1(c) reads as follows:
"1.
ട കസന സ
ദമ യ 7 1 /2 ലക (ഏഴര ലക ) ര
യ 14.07.2009 മ തല ടയ "
ആണന ല 12%
ലശയ ഈ കസന) ചലവകല"
( ത"
ചലവ യ 10,000/- ( തന യര) ര യ ഇന
മ തല (ആറ ) മ സതന വ ദള ( ത"
നലന"
ള നമന സമതചര"
ന .
വ ദള അ ( ര നചയ ത ക ട കസല വവര"
ന ഈ , ക ടതയനല O.S.113/2007-)0 നമര കസന) വധയന സരച
ഈ കസനല ( ത"
വസ ത
, നയമ ന സരണ കവശന>ട
ത നതന യ നത ര തടസവ ഇല ല നയന ഇര കള സമതചര"
ന .
വധനടതല വ ദള ഒര
വധ തര"വ
ഉനയ"
നതല ല.
ല വധ ഈ ര ജ ഹരജയ
നട സതയ ണ . ഒര വധതല ല വധ നEടട നതന
വ ദള"
അവ ശമല ല .
ഈ ര ജഹരജ മ
കGന O.S.113/2007-)0 നമര കസനല ഡ ("
യ നത ര വധ ദIരJലKവ സഭവചടല ല നയന
ഇര
ഭ ഗവ സമത"
ന .
കമല നമര കസന) നയമ രമ യ നലനല> അഗEര"ന>ടടല ല.
2.
ഈ കസനല ചലവ ട ക ടത ചലവന വകധയമ യ സഹചര"
ന .
3.
ഈ ര ജ ( ര വEഴ ച വര ത ന ക O.S.113/2007 നമരനല വധ നട> "
നതന ( ത"
അവ ശമ ളത മ ന .
4.
ആയ ല ക ടതയനല ദയവ ണ യ കമല ര ജ വKവസ ( ര അനK യ വധയ ണ ണനമന
അക കച ന ള ന ."
3. When the terms contained in Ext.R1(c) were also not honoured, 1st respondent herein sought to execute the decree to have the petitioner herein evicted from the property. As things now stand, a sum of Rs.3.5 lakhs has been deposited in the court below by the petitioner herein and Rs.1 lakh as per the order of this Court.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the petitioner may be given time till 30.04.2015 to pay the entire amount as covered by Ext.R1(c) in terms of the compromise as mentioned therein.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent took strong objection to the prayer made by the petitioner pointing out that it is not a money decree that is being executed but a decree for eviction. In fact, it is for the petitioner to deposit money and get the sale deed from the 1st respondent herein.
6. Whatever that be, in the light of the fact that a sum of Rs.4.5 lakhs is already in deposit before the court below, if the petitioner is allowed to pay the balance amount in two instalments ending in 30.04.2015, this Court feels that it may
give a quietus to the litigation between the parties.
7. In spite of the objection raised by the 1st respondent, it is ordered as follows:
If the petitioner deposits the balance amount due as per Ext.R1(c) in two instalments, last of the instalments shall be paid on or before 30.04.2015, Ext.R1(c) will be given effect to. Otherwise the decree now in execution shall be executed and further proceedings shall be taken by the decree holder. Till then execution of the decree will be kept in abeyance. Sd/- P.BHAVADASAN JUDGE smp