IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 10577 of 2010(O)
1. JITHESH P.R.
... Petitioner
Vs
1. RAVEENDRAN PILLAI
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.DINESH R.SHENOY
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.BHAVADASAN
Dated :26/03/2010
O R D E R
P. BHAVADASAN, J
---------------------------
W.P.C.No.10577 OF 2010
---------------------------------------------
Dated this the 26th day of March, 2010
J U D G M E N T
In this writ petition the following reliefs are sought for :
“A writ of mandamus or any other
appropriate, writ, order or direction directing
the Principal Sub judge, Ernakulam to take up
and dispose of Ext.P9 and P11 applications on
merits after affording sufficient opportunities
to the plaintiffs to submit all the materials
and after hearing them also.
A writ of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction directing
that the orders dated 6.3.2010 passed in
I.A.Nos.3815/09 and 9299/09 in O.S.439/09,
Sub Court, Ernakulam shall kept in abeyance
till Exhibits P9 and P10 are heard and finally
dispose off.”
2. The petitioner is the second plaintiff in O.S.439/09
before the Sub Court, Ernakulam. Suit was for fixation of
WPC.10577/10 2
boundary. According to the petitioner, the first respondent
trespassed into his property and therefore, he filed this suit.
After obtaining an order of interim injunction on Ext.P1, a
Commission was taken out and the commission report was
produced and marked as Ext.P2. In the interim application,
the respondents filed objections. It is pointed out that taking
advantage of the long posting of the case to 3.2.2010 the
respondents tried to trespass into the property and put up a
compound wall. A fresh application was filed by the
petitioner seeking injunction restraining trespass into his
property vide I.A.9299/09, copy of which is produced as
Ext.P4. They also filed I.A.9298/09 to advance posting of the
case to an immediate date for hearing. It is pointed out that
since no orders were passed, the petitioners were
constrained to file application before the vacation court.
Vacation court considering the nature of the suit, passed
Ext.P5 order. After vacation, a counter affidavit has been
filed in the interim application. They also filed a petition to
advance hearing I.A.9299/09. The said application was
WPC.10577/10 3
posted to 20.05.2010. Second respondent filed further
application advancing I.A.9299/09 to the nearest possible
date as I.A.1432/10. Copy of the I.A. is produced as Ext.P8.
The case is posted to 27.2.2010. On 27.2.2010 advanced
I.A.9299/10 and posted to 6.3.2010 for passing orders.
Surprisingly, it is found that on 6.3.2010 ‘A’ Diary:-
“I.A.9299/09, I.A. Dismissed”. Petitioner, since he was not
heard on the said application, filed three petitions.
I.A.2235/10 to recall orders passed on 6.3.2010, I.A.2234/10
to keep the order in abeyance. Copy of I.A.2234/10 is
produced and marked as Ext.P10. The petitioner says that
the case was adjourned to 25.3.2010. On 25.3.2010 the
date to which case was advanced, without hearing the
plaintiff on different I.As filed for rehearing and recalling,
case was posted to 22.5.2010. It is pointed out that this
lukewarm attitude of the court enables the respondents to
take advantage of the dismissal of the interlocutory
application and they are trying to trespass into the property.
He therefore pointed out that it is absolutely essential to
WPC.10577/10 4
consider the three petitions to recall, rehear and stay of
interim order at the earliest so as to redress his grievance.
3. In the nature of orders to be passed, notice to
respondents is unnecessary. The anxiety of the petitioner is
understandable. The petition ought to have been disposed of
at the earliest. The Principle Sub Court, Ernakulam is
directed to dispose the I.A.2235/09 and I.A.2234/10 on
31.3.2010 and pass orders thereon and the petitioner shall
inform the respondent about the posting of the case on
31.3.2010. Till then the order dated 6.3.2010 shall be kept
in abeyance. Sent copy to Sub Court, Ernakulam.
This writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
P. BHAVADASAN, JUDGE.
Sou.