SANKARAN NAIR RAMAKRISHNAN NAIR Vs. MADHAVI AMMA EASWARI AMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the Judgment debtor in a decree for recovery of amounts passed in favour of one Chandrasekhara Pillai. While E. P. No. 100 of 1975 was pending, Chandrasekhara Pillai died on 10-2-1977 and a memo to that effect was filed by the decree holder's Advocate, The case was thereafter posted for further steps. The present respondent got herself impleaded as the legal representative of the original decree holder. When steps under O.21, R. 37 of the Civil P. C. were taken, the petitioner filed objection disputing the amount claimed and his liability for being arrested. He also contended that the respondent as the additional decree holder was not competent to proceed with the execution without production of the succession certificate. The petition stood posted to 31-10-1977. On that date, the respondent and her counsel were not present and the petition was dismissed.

(2.) The respondent thereafter filed E. P. No. 8 of 1978 seeking execution of the decree. The petitioner was absent on the date when the execution petition came up for hearing. The court held that means of the petitioner and his refusal to make payment stood proved by the affidavit filed by the decree holder. The executing court ordered issue of warrant against judgment debtor. It is against this order that the present revision petition is filed.

(3.) The main contention put forward on behalf of the petitioner is based on S.214(1) of the Indian Succession Act relating to production of the succession certificate. The argument is that the Court should have insisted on the production by the respondent of the succession certificate entitling her to recover the amount before proceeding with the execution petition. S.214(1) reads: