Francis vs Raphel
2021 Latest Caselaw 7062 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                              PRESENT

              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.V.ANILKUMAR

     MONDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 10TH PHALGUNA, 1942

                        OP(C).No.480 OF 2021

 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OS 1232/2007 OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF
                       COURT ,IRINJALAKUDA


PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS/JUDGMENT DEBTORS:

      1       FRANCIS
              AGED 62 YEARS
              W/O.PORATHUKKARAN ANTHONY, AMBALLUR VILLAGE,
              MANNAMPETTA DESOM, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR
              DISTRICT.

      2       JOLLY,
              AGED 56 YEARS
              W/O.PORATHUKKARAN FRANCIS, AMBALLUR VILLAGE,
              MANNAMPETTA DESOM, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR
              DISTRICT.

              BY ADV. SMT.RENJU SEBASTIAN

RESPONDENT:

              RAPHEL
              AGED 53 YEARS
              S/O.PORATHUKKARAN ANTHONY, AMBALLUR VILLAGE,
              MANNAMPETTA DESOM, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR
              DISTRICT.


     THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.03.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 OP(C).No.480 OF 2021

                                  2




                               JUDGMENT

Dated this the 1st day of March 2021

The petitioners in this O.P. are judgment debtors in EP

No.2794/2017 in O.S. No.1232/2007 on the file of the Additional

Munsiff Court, Irinjalakuda.

2. The suit was decreed against the petitioners which

they challenged in A.S. No.117/2017 before Sub Court, Irinjalakuda,

The appeal was dismissed on 28.01.2020. The grievance expressed

by the petitioners is that because of Covid-19 pandemic, the

petitioners were not in a position to file appeal before High Court of

Kerala within time. In the meantime, the respondent has initiated

execution proceedings for taking delivery of possession of property.

3. The learned counsel for the respondent/decree

holder who entered appearance today submitted that, the execution

proceedings are posted for delivery. On the date when this matter

came up for admission, this Court directed the petitioners, to file an

appeal before this Court and intimate the date of institution of

appeal.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted

that the petitioners were not in any position to file appeal till date OP(C).No.480 OF 2021

and they will be able to file appeal within a period of one month. The

submission made is recorded.

5. After hearing counsel appearing on both sides, I am

of the opinion that, the execution proceedings before the Additional

Munsiff, Irinjalakuda, shall be postponed for a temporary period of

one month. In order to enable the petitioners to file appeal within

the above period.

In the result, this O.P is disposed of directing the

Additional Munsiff, Irinjalakuda, to postpone the delivery

proceedings for a period of one month from today. It is directed that

the petitioners may file appeal challenging dismissal of A.S.No.

117/2017 before the appropriate forum within the above stipulated

period. It is made clear that in the event of appeal not being filed

within the time stipulated above and the delivery proceedings not

stayed, the execution court will be at liberty to proceed with

execution proceedings in accordance with law.

Sd/-

T.V.ANILKUMAR JUDGE SMF OP(C).No.480 OF 2021

APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN A.S. 117/2017 DATED 28.01.2020 OF THE SUB COURT, IRINJALAKUDA.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE E.A.93/2021 IN E.P.NO.2794/2017 IN O.S.1232/2007 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT, IRINJALAKUDA.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN E.A.93/2021 IN E.P.NO.2794/2017 IN O.S.NO.1232/2017 OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, IRINJALAKUDA.

//TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE