Kerala High Court
Hariprakash vs Harikumar on 17 January, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
MONDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 27TH POUSHA, 1943
OP(C) NO. 921 OF 2021
(PENDING E.P NO.104/2019 IN O.S.NO.26/2007 IN THE FILES OF THE
HON'BLE MUNSIFF COURT, KARUNAGAPPALLY)
PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF/DECREE HOLDER
HARIPRAKASH
AGED 53 YEARS
S/O.KRISHNAN NAIR, PACHAMKULATHU VEEDU, PULIYOORVANCHI
VADAKKUM MURI, THODIYOOR VILLAGE,
KARUNGAPPALLY - 690 523.
BY ADV M.R.SASITH
RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS/JUDGMENT DEBTORS
1 HARIKUMAR
AGED 53 YEARS
S/O.KRISHNAN NAIR, PACHAMKULATHU VEEDU, PULIYOORVANCHI
VADAKKUM MURI, THODIYOOR VILLAGE,
KARUNAGAPPALLY - 690 523.
2 MADHAVIKUTTY AMMA
AGED 71 YEARS
D/O.BHAIKUTTY AMMA, USHAS, PERINADU P.O, ANCHALUMMOODU,
PACHAMKULATHU VEEDU, KOLLAM - 691 601.
3 KRISHNANKUTTY NAIR
AGED 63 YEARS
S/O.KRISHNAN NAIR, PACHAMKULATHU VEEDU, PULIYOORVANCHI
VADAKKUM MURI, THODIYOOR VILLAGE,
KARUNGAPPALLY - 690 523.
BY ADV S.GREESHMA SHANMUKHAN
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
17.01.2022, ALONG WITH OP(C).2428/2021, THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP(C) Nos.921 of 2021 and 2428 OF 2021
2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
MONDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 27TH POUSHA, 1943
OP(C) NO. 2428 OF 2021
(IN IA NO.3/2021 IN RP.IA 38/2021 DATED 11/11/21 IN OS NO.26/2007
PASSED BY THE MUNSIFF COURT, KARUNAGAPPALLY)
PETITIONERS/DEFENDANTS 1 AND 3/PETITIONER 2&1
1 HARIKUMAR,AGED 56 YEARS
S/O KRISHNAN NAIR, PACHAMKULATHU HOUSE,
P V NORTH, THODIYOOR VILLAGE,
THAZHAVA P O, KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM,
KERALA-690523.
2 KRISHNANKUTTY NAIR, AGED 66 YEARS,
S/O KRISHNAN NAIR, PACHAMKULATHU HOUSE, P V NORTH,
THODIYOOR VILLAGE, THAZHAVA P O,
KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM-690523.
BY ADVS.
S.GREESHMA SHANMUKHAN
NEMOM CHANDRA BABU
APARNA SARASWATI
ANZU K VARKEY
RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFFS/ 2ND DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT 1&2
1 HARIPRAKASH, AGED 56 YEARS
S/O KRISHNAN NAIR,
PACHAMKULATHU HOUSE,
P V NORTH, THODIYOOR VILLAGE, THAZHAVA P O,
KARUNAGAPPALLY,
KOLLAM-690523.
2 MADHAVIKUTTY AMMA
AGED 74 YEARS, USHUS, PERINAD P O,
ANCHALUMOODU, KOLLAM-691601.
OP(C) Nos.921 of 2021 and 2428 OF 2021
3
BY ADV M.R.SASITH
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
17.01.2022, ALONG WITH OP(C).921/2021, THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP(C) Nos.921 of 2021 and 2428 OF 2021
4
JUDGMENT
O.P(C) No.921/2021 is a petition filed under Article 227 of
the Constitution of India by the decree holder seeking
expeditious disposal of E.P 104/2019 in O.S No.26/2007
pending before the Munsiff Court, Karunagappally. When the
matter is taken for hearing, the learned counsel for the
respondents/judgment debtors submitted that the respondents
have no objection in allowing the prayer.
2. Coming to O.P (C) No. 2428 /2021, dismissal of I.A
3/2021 in RP.IA 38/2021 dated 11.11.2021 in O.S No.26/2007
is under challenge at the instance of judgment debtors 1 and
3.
3. Heard the learned counsel on both sides.
4. Going by the impugned order in I.A 3/2021, it could
be seen that I.A 1/2021 also was filed to condone the delay.
RPIA 38/2021, in fact, is an application filed to set aside the
decree dated 22.10.2018 in the above suit. In the said petition,
OP(C) Nos.921 of 2021 and 2428 OF 2021
the condonation of delay of 1020 days also was sought for. It
appears as could be read out from the order of the learned
Munsiff that the Learned Munsiff given ten postings specifically
for giving evidence in the above petition and the
petitioners/judgment debtors 1 and 3 not opted to give
evidence in support of their contentions in the above petition.
5. At this juncture, it is pertinent to notice that the crux
of the dispute is confined to a mediation agreement signed
between the plaintiff and defendants 1 and 3. Defendants 1 and
3 in the above mediation agreement, who are judgment
debtors 1 and 3, are the petitioners herein. According to the
learned counsel for judgment debtors 1 and 2 the signatures in
the mediation agreement were forged by the decree holder. In
view of the submission I have perused para no.4 of the
synopsis of this petition, it has been specifically admitted by the
petitioners that "the petitioners merely signed in the agreement
at the instigation of the decree holder while the suit against the
second judgment debtor/second respondent was dismissed for
OP(C) Nos.921 of 2021 and 2428 OF 2021
default on 25.05.2009". It has been contended further that,
"though JD 2 has not appeared before a mediator and put a
signature on her behalf, signed in the agreement". It is
interesting to note that JD 2 is not a petitioner in this original
petition or in the petition filed before the execution court. Thus
it appears that the petitioners, who admitted their signatures in
the mediation agreement, which resulted in passing the decree
now put in execution, in fact, are disputing the mediation
agreement on the allegation that JD 2 didn't put signature in
the mediation agreement. JD 2 never raised such a contention
and if at all such a contention raised by JD 2, the same cannot
be accepted since the challenge was raised at a much belated
stage after executing the mediation agreement. Thus it appears
that the challenge raised by the petitioners disputing the
mediation agreement is baseless and their intension is to delay
the execution of the decree by pursuing unwanted petitions.
Therefore, I could not find any merit in the O.P(C)
No.2428/2021 and the same deserves a dismissal.
OP(C) Nos.921 of 2021 and 2428 OF 2021
Accordingly, O.P(C)No. 2428/2021 is dismissed.
6. Coming to O.P (C) 921/2021, the learned Munsiff as
per letter dated 01.10.2021 expressed his willingness to
dispose of the case within 3 months.
7. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the decree
holder that the decree is not executed so far due to pendency
of these matters.
Therefore, I am inclined to allow O.P(C) No.921/2021 with
a direction to the learned Munsiff to expedite its disposal before
close for summer vacation without fail.
Sd/-
A.BADHARUDEEN, JUDGE
Cak
OP(C) Nos.921 of 2021 and 2428 OF 2021
APPENDIX OF OP(C) 921/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION FILED BY
THE PETITIONER IN E.P 104/2019 IN O.S
26/2007 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MUNSIFF COURT,
KARUNGAPPALLY ON 15/07/2019.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF CASE HISTORY OF E.P NO.104/2019
IN O.S NO.26/2007 OF KARUNGAPPALLY.
OP(C) Nos.921 of 2021 and 2428 OF 2021
APPENDIX OF OP(C) 2428/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE IN O.S
NO.26/2007, DATED 22.10.2018 PASSED BY
MUNSIFF COURT, KARUNAGAPPALLY.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDIATION REPORT DATED
16.10.2018.
Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER IN E.A
62/2021 AND 63/2021 IN E.P 104/2019 IN O.S
NO.26/2007 DATED 31.08.2021 BY MUNSIFF
COURT,KARUNAGAPPALLY.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.10.2021 IN
E.A NO.74/2021 IN E.P 104/2019 IN O.S
26/2007.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 11.11.2021 IN
IA NO.3/2021 IN RPIA NO.38/2021 IN O.S
NO.26/2007 PASSED BY THE MUNSIFF COURT,
KARUNAGAPPALLY.
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE
