Deepa Sunil Kumar vs Deepa Anand
2021 Latest Caselaw 6889 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.267 OF 2020

 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OP 1625/2012 OF FAMILY COURT,
                         THIRUVALLA


PETITIONER:

               DEEPA SUNIL KUMAR, AGED 42 YEARS, W/O SUNIL KUMAR,
               KUMPILIL MANNIL HOUSE (VIJAYA DEEPAM), ERAVIPEROOR
               P.O.THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN-689
               542.

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.VISHAK.K.JOHNSON
               SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN
               SRI.S.NITHIN (ANCHAL)

RESPONDENTS:

      1        DEEPA ANAND, AGED 38 YEARS, D/O ANANDAN,
               THUNDUVILA VEEDU, RADIO JUNCTION, PERUMPUZHA
               P.O.KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 504.

      2        DILEEP KUMAR, AGED 39 YEARS, D/O DIVAKRAN,
               KAILATHU VEEDU, VENPALA P.O.THIRUVALLA,
               PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, NOW RESIDING AT
               THUNDUVILA VEEDU, RADIO JUNCTION, PERUMPUZHA
               P.O.KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 504.

      3        M.G DIVAKARAN, AGED 67 YEARS, KAILATHU VEEDU,
               VENPALA P.O.THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-
               689 102.


     THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26-
02-2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 OP (FC).No.267 OF 2020

                                 ..2..




                           JUDGMENT

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

Though notice was issued, service as against 1st

and 2nd respondents is not complete. However, taking

note of the nature of the reliefs sought for in this original petition, we decide to dispose of this

matter on perusal of records.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner

submits that his claim petition was allowed as per

order in E.A. No. 22 of 2019 in E.P. No. 9 of 2018

on the file of the Family Court, Thiruvalla.

However, in spite of such claim being sustained, the

Execution Court is proceeding with the sale of the

land involved.

3. Having considered the claim as above, we

are of the view that before proceeding with the

execution, the Execution Court shall consider the

petitioner's objection in proceeding with the sale OP (FC).No.267 OF 2020

..3..

in respect of the land covered by the order in E.A.

No.22 of 2019 dated 15.10.2019. It is made clear

that the Execution Court shall not proceed with the

sale of the property without adverting to the order

in E.A, No. 22 of 2019.

4. The petitioner shall produce the copy of

the judgment before the Execution court.

This Original petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

JUDGE

Sd/-

KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

JUDGE

PR OP (FC).No.267 OF 2020

..4..

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS NO 25/2020 ON THE FILES OF THEMUNSIFFS COURT, THIRUVALLA

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OP NO 1625/2012 DATED 7.6.2014 ON THE FILES OF THE FAMILY COURT, KOLLAM

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION NO 9/2018 ONT HE FILES OF THE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVALLA DATED 12.3.2018

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE CLAIM PETITION IN EA NO 22/2019 IN EP NO 9/2018 ON THE FILES OF THE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVALLA DATED MARCH 2018

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ON CLAIM PETITION IN EA NO 22/2019 IN EP NO 9/2018 ON THE FILES OF THE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVALLA DATED 15.10.2019

EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN OP NO 395/2020 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 11.2.2020

EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE PROCLAMATION IN EP NO 9/2018 IN OP NO 1625/2012 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT THIRUVALLA