[email protected] vs Nisha
2021 Latest Caselaw 6862 Ker

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                           PRESENT

      THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

                              &

     THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

  FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 7TH PHALGUNA,
                           1942

                    OP (FC).No.19 OF 2020

   AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OP 888/2012 OF FAMILY
                    COURT, OTTAPPALAM


PETITIONER:

              [email protected], AGED 43 YEARS, S/O
              NARAYANAN, PADINJAREPURACKAL HOUSE, MUNNURCODE
              P.O.THRIKKADERI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-679
              502.

              BY ADVS.
              SRI.B.S.SWATHI KUMAR
              SMT.ANITHA RAVINDRAN

RESPONDENT:

              NISHA, D/O KUMARAN, THATTAMPAKKIL HOUSE,
              PANAMANNA P.O.KOTHAKURISSI AMSON, DESOM,
              OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-679
              501.

              R1 BY ADV. SRI.R.SREEHARI

     THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
26-02-2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 OP (FC).No.19 OF 2020

                              ..2..




                      JUDGMENT

Dated this the 26th day of February 2021 A.Muhamed Mustaque, J

This original petition was filed challenging the

execution proceedings in E.A No.118 of 2019 in E.P.

No.13 of 2018 in O.P. No.888 of 2012 on the file of the Family Court, Ottapalam. The execution was laid

by the respondent to realise a sum of Rs.3,40,800/-

with interest, that was sought to be recovered

through the sale of the immovable property belongs

to the petitioner. Challenging this, the original

petition was filed on 14.01.2020.

2. This Court on 5.02.2020 passed the

following order:

"Learned counsel for the petitioner/husband submits that he is prepared to pay the entire amount due under the decree on or before 31st March, 2020.

Learned counsel for the respondent/wife also submitted that she wants money and not very much keen in selling the property.

Heard the submissions. Post the case on 01-04- 2020.

In the meantime, the petitioner shall clear off all the liabilities under the decree. Interim order is extended till 01-04-2020." OP (FC).No.19 OF 2020

..3..

3. The learned counsel for the respondent

submits that, so far the decree amount has not been

satisfied and the amount due is yet to be recovered

from the petitioner. We do not find any reason to

retain this matter as more than one year lapsed

after the afore noted interim order. If the

petitioner cannot discharge his liability under the

decree, he should face the consequences of the

execution proceedings.

With the observations as above, this original

petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

JUDGE

Sd/-

KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

JUDGE

PR OP (FC).No.19 OF 2020

..4..

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OP NO 888/2012 DATED 26.8.2013 OF THE FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENT DATED 15.7.2016 IN LOK ADALAT CASE PL NO 21/16

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE EP NO 13/2018 IN OP NO 888/2012 DATED 7.5.2018 OF THE FAMILY COURT, OTTAPALAM

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN EA NO 28/2019 IN EP NO 13/2018 IN OP NO 888/2012 DATED 13.3.2019 OF THE FAMILY COURT, OTTAPALAM

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN EP NO 13/2018 IN OP NO 888/2012 DATED 31.5.2019 OF THE FAMILY COURT, OTTAPALAM

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE DIARY EXTRACT IN EP 13/2018 IN OP 888/2013 OF THE FAMILY COURT, OTTAPALAM