Petition seeking disclosure of assets - Court which pass the decree has Jurisdiction to entertain - can be filed before filing EP - Not only for attachment and sale - even for arrest EP asset enquiry petition is Maintainable.

Kerala High Court

Shibu Sebastian vs Unknown 

on 17 March, 2021        

  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM               

           PRESENT          THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.V.ANILKUMARWEDNESDAY,

 THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 26TH PHALGUNA, 1942             

      OP(C).No.3360 OF 2019AGAINST THE ORDER IN IA 381/2019 IN OS 29/2019 OF SUB COURT,            

                PALAPETITIONER/1ST COUNTER PETITIONER/1ST DEFENDANT:            SHIBU SEBASTIAN            AGED 55 YEARS            S/O.SEBASTIAN, KIZHAKKEKKARA HOUSE,            MEENACHIL.P.O., PALA, KOTTAYAM-686589.        

    BY ADV. SRI.V.K.PEERMOHAMED KHANRESPONDENTS/PETITIONR AND COUNTER PETITIONERS 2-4/PLAINTIFFAND DEFENDANTS 2-4:      1     MARYKUTTY MARSHAL            AGED 63 YEARS            W/O.E.P.RADHAKRISHNAN, 18 SHAYONA BUNGLOWS, PART            III, SHAYONA CITY, R.C.TECHNICAL ROAD,            CHATLODIA, AHMEDABAD-380061, REP. BY POWER OF            ATTORNEY HOLDER C.T.KURIAKOSE, CHINGAMPARAMBIL            HOUSE, THURUTHY.P.O., CHANGANASSERY, KOTTAYAM.      2     BINDUMOL SHIBU,            W/O.SHIBU SEBASTIAN, KIZHAKKEKKARA HOUSE,            MEENACHIL.P.O., MEENACHIL VILLAGE, MEENACHIL            TALUK, KOTTAYAM-686589.      3     DENNA MATHEW,            AGED 26 YEARS, D/O.SHIBU SEBASTIAN,            KIZHAKKEKKARA HOUSE, MEENACHIL.P.O., MEENACHIL            VILLAGE, MEENACHIL TALUK, KOTTAYAM-686589. O.P.(C)No.3360 of 2019                           :-2-:      4     DAWN MATHEW,            AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.SHIBU SEBASTIAN,            KIZHAKKEKKARA HOUSE, MEENACHIL.P.O., MEENACHIL            VILLAGE, MEENACHIL TALUK, KOTTAYAM-686589.            R1 BY ADV. SRI.JAMES KURIAN     THIS  OP  (CIVIL)   HAVING    BEEN   FINALLY  HEARD    ON17.03.2021, THE COURT    ON THE    SAME   DAY DELIVERED    THEFOLLOWING: O.P.(C)No.3360 of 2019                                    :-3-:          

  Dated this the 17th day of March, 2021    

                        J U D G M E N T

The first defendant in O.S.No.29 of 2019 on the file of the Sub Court, Pala, challenges Ext.P5 impugned order dated 10.10.2019 passed by the court below allowing Ext.P3 I.A.No.381/2019 filed by the first respondent/plaintiff.2. The suit was filed for realisation of money based on a dishonoured cheque. Apprehending that the defendants were taking hasty steps for disposing of their properties in India and leaving the country, plaintiffs filed an interlocutory application for an order calling upon the defendants to file an affidavit stating the particulars of assets of each defendants. That application was opposed before the court below. Overruling the objections raised, the application was allowed by the impugned order. O.P.(C)No.3360 of 2019 :-4-:3. One of the challenges raised before the court below was that an application filed under Order XXI Rule 41(2) of CPC is not maintainable on trial side. This contention was met by the plaintiffs relying on a decision reported in State Bank of India v. M.K.Raveendran (2009(4) KLT 683). In that decision, this Court took the view that the power available under Order XXI Rule 41(2) of CPC could be invoked by a court sitting on trial side as well.4. After hearing the learned counsel appearing on both sides in this original petition, I find my way difficult to interfere with the impugned order. I am of considered opinion that the impugned order does not suffer from any illegality or impropriety. Even on factual grounds as well, the view taken by the court below is perfectly sound. It is only just and fair that the defendants, who were alleged to O.P.(C)No.3360 of 2019 :-5-:be taking steps for leaving the country, are called upon to furnish details of their assets in the form of an affidavit.In the result, this original petition fails and it is dismissed.All pending interlocutory applications are closed.Sd/-T.V.ANILKUMAR JUDGE ami/ O.P.(C)No.3360 of 2019 :-6-:

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS.NO.29/2019 FILED BEFORE THE SUB COURT, PALA. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE 1ST DEFENDANT IN O.S.NO.29/2019 BEFORE THE SUB COURT, PALA DATED 29.8.2019.EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION IN I.A.NO.381/2019 IN O.S.NO.29/2019 ON THE FILES OF SUB COURT, PALA DATED 27.5.2019.EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 29.8.2019. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.NO.381/2019 IN O.S.NO.29/2019 OF THE SUB COURT, PALA DATED 10.10.2019.