IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
OP.No. 6554 of 2003(E)
1. N.KEUNKEN PILLAI, PUTHUVA VEEDU,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PATHANAMTHITTA,
For Petitioner :SRI.N.DHARMADAN (SR.)
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble SHRI K. Justice J.THOMAS STANLEY(RETD.ADDL.DIST.JUDGE)
Dated :07/10/2008
O R D E R
BARRISTER SRI.M.P.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
(SENIOR ADVOCATE, HIGH COURT OF KERALA)
AND
SRI.K.J.THOMAS STANLEY
(REITRED DISTRICT JUDGE)
=================================
O.P.No.6554 of 2003
=================================
Dated this the 7th day of October, 2008
AWARD
Counsel for the petitioner as well as the respondents are
present. It is represented by the counsel for the petitioner that
his client has received Kerala Freedom Fighters Pension.
Therefore, he has no more grievances in this original petition.
The original petition is closed as settled.
M.P.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
(SENIOR ADVOCATE, HIGH COURT OF KERALA)
K.J.THOMAS STANLEY
(REITRED DISTRICT JUDGE)
dvs
? IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
+WP(C).No. 29573 of 2008(U)
#1. CHELLAMMA
... Petitioner
Vs
$1. RAJAMMA
... Respondent
! For Petitioner :SRI.PREMCHAND R.NAIR
^ For Respondent : No Appearance
*Coram
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR
% Dated :07/10/2008
: O R D E R
V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE
——————————
W.P.C. NO. 29573 OF 2008
——————————
DATED: 7-10-2008
JUDGMENT
Petitioner who is the first plaintiff in O.S. 355 of 2006
on the file of the Munsiff’s Court, Kottarakkara inter alia
seeks a direction to the Sub Court, Kottarakkara to consider
and dispose of Ext.P6 appeal filed as C.M.A. 19 of 2007
expeditiously. Ext.P6 appeal has been preferred against
Ext. P5 order passed by the learned Munsiff in the
application for temporary injunction filed by the petitioner
and the 2nd plaintiff as I.A. 2833 of 2006. The suit is one for
setting aside Ext.B1 sale deed dated 18-10-1988
purportedly executed by the 2nd plaintiff in favour of
additional 3rd defendant Krishnan . The trial court was not
inclined to accept the plaintiffs’ contention that they are in
possession of the plaint schedule property notwithstanding
Ext.B1 sale deed in the year 1988. It is aggrieved by the
W.P.(C ) 29573 of 2008 -:2:-
said order that the said appeal has been filed. In the
fitness things of it is only just and proper that the Sub
Judge, Kottarakkara is directed to dispose of C.M.A. 19 of
2007 expeditiously.
This Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of directing
the Sub Court, Kottarakkara to finally hear and dispose of
C.M.A. 19 of 2007 expeditiously provided the same is ripe
for hearing. I am not inclined to stay the trial of the suit if
the same has been listed for trial. If before the Sub Court
takes up the appeal for hearing the trial of the case is
taken by the Munsiff’s Court, it shall be open to the
petitioner to raise all contentions available to her in support
of the plaint claim. In case the C.M.A is ripe for hearing,
the Sub Court shall dispose of the same within two months
of receipt of a copy of this judgment if the same is
practicable.
Dated this the 7th day of October 2008.
Sd/-
V. Ramkumar, Judge.
ani/
W.P.(C ) 29573 of 2008 -:3:-