IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 8318 of 2009(O)
1. SUBRAMANIAN
... Petitioner
Vs
1. K.CHANDRIKA
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.SAJU.S.A
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :16/03/2009
O R D E R
K.T.SANKARAN, J.
------------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) NO. 8318 OF 2009 O
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 16th March, 2009
JUDGMENT
The respondent herein filed O.S.No.265 of 1999 before the
Munsiff’s Court, Tirur for eviction of the petitioner from the building which
belongs to the respondent. The petitioner claimed kudikidappu right. He
also filed an application before the Land Tribunal under Section 80B of
the Kerala Land Reforms Act. That application was dismissed. The
appeal filed by him before the Appellate Authority was also dismissed. It
is submitted that a Revision was filed against that judgment. Learned
counsel for the petitioner submits that the Revision was returned for
curing certain defects and it was re-presented. He also stated that the
Registry takes the view that it was not re-presented. Whatever it may be,
as things stand, the order passed by the Land Tribunal as confirmed by
the Appellate authority govern the field .
2. The suit for eviction was decreed exparte. The petitioner filed
an application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
That application was dismissed on the merits. The Appeal filed against
that order was also dismissed. The petitioner challenged the order and
the judgment in Revision. The Revision was also dismissed.
W.P.(C) NO.8318 OF 2009
:: 2 ::
3. Thereafter, the petitioner filed A.S.No.23 of 2009 before the Sub
Court, Tirur challenging the exparte decree. Ext.P5 application dated
20.2.2009 was filed in the Appeal to condone the delay of 880 days in
filing the Appeal. Ext.P6 application dated 20.2.2009 was also filed in the
Appeal praying for stay of all further proceedings in E.P.No.80 of 2007. It
is submitted that Ext.P5 and Ext.P6 applications are pending.
4. Meanwhile, execution proceedings were initiated. Delivery was
ordered. The petitioner apprehends delivery of the property before
20.3.2009. This Writ Petition is filed with a prayer to issue a direction to
the Sub Court, Tirur to hear and dispose of Exts.P5 and P6 applications
and also to pass an order of stay of execution of the decree, pending
disposal of Exts.P5 and P6 applications.
5. The suit was filed in 1999. All the attempts made by the
petitioner to challenge the exparte decree failed. His application for
purchase of kudikidappu also stands dismissed. More than ten years
passed after filing the suit. At this juncture, if the execution proceedings
are stayed, it will cause great injustice to the decree holder. The relief
prayed for to dispose of Exts.P5 and P6 applications is closely connected
with the prayer for stay. Exts.P5 and P6 applications were filed only in
W.P.(C) NO.8318 OF 2009
:: 3 ::
February 2009. It is not necessary to issue a direction as prayed for.
There is no merit in the contention that the execution proceedings are
liable to be stayed.
The Writ Petition lacks merits and it is accordingly dismissed.
(K.T.SANKARAN)
Judge
ahz/