The defendants in O.S.No.389/2008 before the Munsiff Court, Chalakkudy are the petitioners herein. In E.P No.304/2012, brought for execution of decree in the suit, notice under Order XXI Rule 37 was given to the petitioners by the executing court. Inspite of notice they did not appear in court and contest the matter. In such a situation, the executing court accepted the affidavit filed by the decree holder regarding the income of the petitioners and ordered warrant of arrest. The said order is under challenge in this petition.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have no contest in the matter, and that they are ready to make payment of the decree debt in ten equal monthly instalments. Notice was given to the learned Standing Counsel for the plaintiff, but there is no representation. Anyway, I feel that an opportunity can be granted to the petitioners to make payment of the decree debt in instalments O.P(C) No.1125 of 2014 2 when such a course will not cause any hardship or prejudice to the plaintiff, who will get interest on the amount. In the said circumstances the impugned order can be set aside and the petitioners can be directed to discharge the decree debt in instalments.
In the result this petition is allowed. The impugned order of the executing court (Munsiff Court, Chalakkudy) issuing warrant of arrest against the petitioners in E.P No.304/2012 is set aside, on condition that the petitioners shall make payment of the decree debt in the executing court in ten equal monthly instalments, commencing from June, 2014 onwards, every instalment being payable in the 1st week of the month. In case of failure to make payment of any instalment in the executing court, the benefit granted by this order will stand cancelled, and the executing court will be at liberty to realise the decree debt by issuing warrant of arrest or otherwise.
Sd/- P.UBAID JUDGE ab