High Court Kerala High Court

Syed Fazal Pookoyathangal vs Valiyathodi Ibrahim on 8 April, 2010

Kerala High Court
Syed Fazal Pookoyathangal vs Valiyathodi Ibrahim on 8 April, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 12649 of 2010(O)


1. SYED FAZAL POOKOYATHANGAL,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. VALIYATHODI IBRAHIM, S/O.MAMMU,AGED 64
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.BHAVADASAN

 Dated :08/04/2010

 O R D E R

P.BHAVADASAN, J.

————————————-
WP(C) No.12649 of 2010-O

————————————-

Dated 8th April 2010

Judgment

The limited prayer of the petitioner in this Writ

Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,

is for a direction to the Munsiff’s Court, Perinthalmanna to

hear and dispose of Ext.P3 (IA No.254/10 in OS No.46/10)

within a time limit to be fixed by this Court.

2. The petitioner is the plaintiff in OS No.46/10

which is a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction,

restraining the defendant from altering the boundary of the

plaint schedule property. Along with the plaint, the

petitioner moved two applications, one for appointing an

Advocate Commissioner and the other for interim

injunction. Copies of the said applications are Exts.P2 and

P3. An Advocate Commissioner was appointed and he

has filed a report.

WPC 12649/10 2

3. On 05.04.2010, it is stated that when the case

was taken up, the counsel for the petitioner prayed for an

order on Ext.P3 IA. But the Court below adjourned the

case to 02.08.2010, stating that the defendant may file a

written statement. The learned counsel for the petitioner

submitted that the order passed by the Court below is

unjustified. In the above circumstances, he approached

this Court, praying for appropriate reliefs.

4. In the light of the order that is proposed to be

passed in this Petition, it is felt that notice is unnecessary

to the parties. If what the petitioner says is true, this Court

can only say that it is unfortunate. The Writ Petition is

disposed of directing the Munsiff’s Court, Perinthalmanna

to take up IA No.254/10 and dispose of the same in

accordance with law after hearing both sides, in the first

week after the re-opening of the court after the mid-

summer vacation.




                                   P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE

WPC 12649/10    3

sta

WPC 12649/10    4