LEELAKUMARI Vs. SHIKHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Reason is the heartbeat of every conclusion. Without the same, it becomes lifeless (Raj Kishore Jha v. State of Bihar, AIR 2003 SC 4664).

(2.) An execution court has ordered detention of a judgment debtor aged 60 years in civil prison for a period of three months in execution of a decree for payment of money. The legality and propriety of that order is challenged in this appeal.

(3.) The appellant is the third respondent in O.P. No. 187 of 2011 on the file of the Family Court, Kollam. It is a case filed by the first respondent herein against her husband and his parents for return of the gold ornaments belonging to her or the value of the ornaments. O.P. No. 187 of 2011 was decreed on 26.08.2015 by the Family Court, Kollam allowing the first respondent to realise from them 296 grams of gold ornaments or their market value. Thereafter, the first respondent/decree holder filed E.P. No. 28 of 2016 in the Family Court, Chavara for execution of the aforesaid decree by sale of the property belonging to the judgment-debtors and also by the arrest and detention of the first and the second judgment-debtors in civil prison. During the pendency of the execution proceedings, the first respondent filed E.A. No. 33 of 2017 for issuing warrant of arrest against the first and the second judgment-debtors, who are her husband and his father, and for their detention in civil prison. The execution court issued notice to the first and the second judgment-debtors under Order 21, Rule 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code'). Though the first and the second judgment-debtors entered appearance, they did not file any objection or counter statement in E.A. No. 33 of 2017. The decree holder was examined as PW1 but no evidence was adduced by the first and the second judgment-debtors. After closing the evidence of the decree holder on 28.02018, the execution court adjourned the case to 21.04.2018 for the evidence of the judgment-debtors. On 21.04.2018, the judgmentdebtors were absent and there was no representation for them and therefore, the court closed the evidence. On the same day, the execution court passed the following order: