IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 12TH APRIL 2011 / 22ND CHAITHRA 1933 OP(C).No. 1427 of 2011(O) OS.27/1989 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,KOLLAM PETITIOENR ------------------------------ SOMAN PILLAI R., THENGUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, PERUMON EAST, PANAYAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.KARTHIKEYA PANICKER SMT.DAYA K. PANICKER RESPONDENT: --------------- THE DIETY OF PERUMON BHAGAVATHI TEMPLE, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT S.R.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR, PERUMON KOYIKKAMUKKATH, SREE BHAGAVATHI TEMPLE, PERINAD, KOLLAM-691601. THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE I.A.NO.3310/2010 IN O.S.NO.27/1989 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, KOLLAM. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE I.A.NO.3311/2010 IN O.S.NO.27/1989 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, KOLLAM. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// AHZ. K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ O.P.(C). NO. 1427 OF 2011 O ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 12th day of April, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner and another filed I.A.No.3310 of 2010 in O.S.NO.27 of 1989, on the file of the Court of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Kollam, for an order of injunction restraining the respondents from demolishing the Perumon Sree Bhagavathi Temple or from doing anything purporting to be done under the guise of renovation of the Temple till a newly elected committee elected in accordance with the provisions contained in the Scheme assumes the office. They also filed I.A.No.3311 of 2010 to remove respondents 2 to 16 therein from the office of the administrative committee of Perumon Sree Bhagavathi Temple, to conduct an election in accordance with the Scheme under the supervision of an Advocate Commissioner and to entrust the administration with the Receiver till a newly elected committee assumes charge. The aforesaid applications were filed in September, 2010. The grievance of the petitioner is that these applications are not disposed of due to the dilatory tactics of the respondents. The respondent in the Original Petition is the first respondent in the aforesaid applications. O.P.(C) NO.1427 OF 2011 O :: 2 :: 2. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the applications were heard and they are posted to 28.5.2011. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners disputed this statement. According to them, though the petitioner was ready the matter could not be taken up because the respondent was seeking adjournment on almost all the posting dates. 3. It is not necessary to decide the controversy as to what was the reason for non-disposal of the applications. The prayer in the Original Petition is to issue a direction to the court below to dispose of these applications. Accordingly, the Original Petition is disposed of directing the Principal Sub Judge, Kollam to hear and dispose of I.A.Nos.3310 and 3311 of 2010 in O.S.No.27 of 1989, as expeditiously as possible and, at any rate, before 30.6.2011. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/