MAMMINIKKANAKATH SHAJAHAJAN Vs. THE SECRETARY, TANUR SERVICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Judgment debtor is the respondent in ARC No. 1379 of 2005 of the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Tanur which is being executed in E.P. No. 35 of 2008 of the court of learned Sub Judge, Tirur. Property of petitioner is being brought up for sale. Petitioner was set ex parte on 18.10.2010. He filed Exts.P2 to P5, objection and application opposing execution. Learned Counsel states that before disposing of Exts.P2 to P5, executing court is proceeding for sale of property.

(2.) Assuming that petitioner was set ex parte in a prior proceeding that does not disentitle him to get notice under Rule 66 of Order 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure when his property is being proceeded against. There is no reason why the executing court will not comply with that provision. If any objection is raised necessarily executing court has to consider the same. Learned Counsel submits that given some time, petitioner is prepared to deposit Rs. 25,000/- immediately and pay the balance in installments. In the circumstances learned Sub Judge is directed to consider Exts.P2 to P5 before the property is scheduled for sale. Executing court shall hear counsel on both sides and decide whether petitioner could be permitted to deposit Rs. 25,000/-immediately and the balance in installments.