A.Nazaruddeen vs Binu Sunil on 27 May, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 9419 of 2009(O)


1. A.NAZARUDDEEN, S/O.ABDUL RAHMAN
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. BINU SUNIL, W/O.DR.SUNIL
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.M.CHANDRAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR

 Dated :27/05/2009

 O R D E R
                             V.RAMKU MAR,J.
                ...........................................................
                       W.P.(C) No. 9419 of 2009
                ...........................................................
                Dated, this the 27th day of May, 2009.

                                  JUDGMENT

Heard both sides.

The writ petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S. No. 126 of 2003 on

the file of the Munsiff’s Court, Attingal. The said suit was one for

recovery of possession of the plaint schedule building with

arrears of rent and for perpetual injunction. The suit was filed as

early as in the year 2003. The suit was once decreed ex parte

and the ex parte decree was got set aside by the respondent who

has thereafter been also resorting to dilatory tactics to see that

the evil day is postponed. Even though he filed a written

statement in the suit, he did not participate in the trial and the

suit was eventually decreed ex parte on 09.01.2008. It is five

years after the institution of the suit that the respondent claims

to have filed an application to set aside the ex parte decree. It

will have to be disposed of in the usual course. The

petitioner/decree holder has filed E.P. No. 44 of 2008. The

W.P.(C) No. 9419/2009 : 2 :

respondent had kept huge arrears of rent necessitating

applications by the writ petitioner and orders by the court. Now

that the decree has become final without there being an appeal

and the decree-holder has filed E.P. No. 44 of 2008, it is only just

and proper that the E.P is finally disposed of. Accordingly, this

writ petition is disposed of directing the learned Munsiff to

dispose of E.P. No. 44 of 2008 as expeditiously as possible and at

any rate within three months of receipt of a copy of this

judgment. The parties shall appear before the Executing Court

on 10.06.2009 without any further notice.

Dated this the 27th day of May, 2009.

V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE.

rv