K.K. RAJEEVAN Vs. C.R. NEENA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and respondents.

(2.) Petitioner is the judgment debtor in E.P.No.21 of 2018 in O.P.No.801 of 1999 before the Family Court, Ernakulam. 1st respondent and petitioner were husband and wife and later their marital relationship was severed by a decree of divorce. Respondents have raised claims for maintenance as well as patrimony. These monetary claims were partly allowed by the Family Court, against which both the parties approached this Court. This Court passed a modified order benefitting the respondents. It is the case of the respondents that they have been running from pillar to post for more than 20 years to get fruits of the decree. Finally, Family Court passed Ext.P6 order which reads as follows: "Decree Holder absent represented. Judgment debtor absent. No representation. No statement also filed as submitted. Decree Holder has filed a detailed calculation statement as per the judgment of this court as modifies by the Hon'ble High Court. The calculations is found to be correct. No objection is filed by the JD to the statement also. Hence the statement is accepted. The statement will form part of the order, JD to pay the balance amount in on month call on 3.10.2019."?

(3.) Aggrieved by Ext.P6 order, the petitioner (judgment debtor) approached this Court contending that he had paid the entire amount due and there is no amount liable to be paid to the respondents.