IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DECEMBER 2009 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 36391 of 2009(O) -------------------------- OS.359/2009 of I ADDL.M.C.,NEYYATTINKARA .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- SHAJI THOMAS, MANJAKKAL HOUSE, KAKKANADU LANE, KESAVADASAPURAM, ULLOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.B.S.SWATHI KUMAR SMT.P.A.ANITHA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. DAMIYAN LOUIS, S/O. CHINAPPAN LOUIS, SACRET HART HOUSE, AMBALATHUMMOOL, CHOWARA P.O., BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-01 2. SRI. MORAYEES, S/O. ISTHORE MORAYEES, ST. JACOB HOUSE, PULLAVILLA P.O, POOVAR KARUMKULAM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -25. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.36391 OF 2009 (O) ----------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the defendant in O.S.No.359 of 2009 on the file of the Ist Additional Munsiff Court, Neyyattinkara. The above suit is one for perpetual prohibitory injunction and the respondents are the defendants. Previously, petitioner has approached this Court seeking issue of a writ/direction/order to the court below for an expeditious disposal of the suit submitting that in view of the orders passed on the interlocutory application in the suit, a project envisaged by him expending about Rs.50 crores is stalled. Taking note of the submissions made by the counsel, Ext.P3 judgment was rendered in that writ petition directing him to bring his grievance to the notice of the court below by filing a petition seeking appropriate orders for disposal of the suit expeditiously. Pursuant to Ext.P3 judgment, it is submitted, despite the court taking earnest efforts to expediate the trial WPC.36391/09 2 and disposal of the suit, dilatory tactics are adopted by the defendants to prolong the litigation. An Advocate Commissioner was appointed by the court for identifying the suit property as desired by the respondents. Commissioner is unable to execute the work in view of the noncooperation of the respondents/plaintiffs, is the submission of the counsel. Petitioner has approached this Court canvassing his grievance that the pendency of the suit is stalling his project and he is put to irreparable injury and suffering. Ext.P8 is the copy of the B diary in the suit which indicate that the learned Munsiff is taking earnest endeavour for a speedy disposal of the suit. It is seen that every week the case is posted and appropriate orders/directions are issued to get a report from the Advocate commissioner expeditiously. If at all the petitioner has any further grievance in the matter as to the dilatory tactics of the respondents/defendants and also the delay in executing of the work by the commissioner for nonproduction of records or noncoopartion by the defendants, he can approach the court below and espouse his grievance for appropriate order. In exercise of the writ jurisdiction vested with this Court under WPC.36391/09 3 Article 227 of the Constitution of India in the given facts, I find it is not proper and appropriate to issue any direction to the court below for an early disposal. Subject to the above observations, the writ petition is closed. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE prp