Research › Search › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 426 (KER)

Mathew Varghese S/O Late Varghese Chengottal v. Wilson John S/O Johny Puthen

2026-03-30

T R Ravi

body2026
JUDGMENT : T.R.RAVI, J. 1. This original petition has been filed with the following prayers: “i. Set aside Exhibit P7 Order dismissing Exhibit P5 application for stay of Exhibit P3. ii. Pass appropriate orders dispensing with production of English translation of Exhibits in Malayalam. iii. Grant such other reliefs which this Hon'ble Court deems just and necessary and that may be prayed for by the Petitioner while hearing the O.P (C)”. 2. The First Appellate court by Ext.P7 order had dismissed the application for stay of Ext.P3. This case was admitted in order to consider whether the petitioner can be directed to furnish security for the balance amount payable as per the decree. However, after notice, the respondent had entered appearance and placed before the court certain facts, which had forced the court to reconsider the very purpose of admitting this original petition. The respondent has produced a copy of the deposition of the petitioner while he was cross examined before the executing court on 07.02.2026. During the cross examination, the petitioner has stated his case and has also stated that he will produce his bank statements. He has stated about certain transactions relating to transfer of properties. On 07.02.2026, the case was adjourned for further evidence to 13.02.2026. It was at that stage the petitioner had filed this original petition on 09.02.2026. In the original petition before this Court, the petitioner has not disclosed the fact that he was being examined before the execution court and that the case has been adjourned for further evidence to 13.02.2026. When a person seeks interference from this Court under Article 227, necessarily he has to disclose all necessary factors. I find that the petitioner has not disclosed the necessary factors and has even not disclosed the most vital aspect that he was being examined and the case has been adjourned for further evidence to another date. For the above sole reason, this original petition is dismissed. This is without prejudice to the contentions of the parties before the execution court and in the appeal.