IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 4TH JUNE 2009 / 14TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 12083 of 2009(O) -------------------------------------- IA 5432/08 IN OS.187/2007 of PRL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- HDFC BANK LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER (LEGAL), SUMIT P. PRASAD. BY ADV. MR.T.RAJESH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- NOORJAHAN SALIM, D/O. AYSHA BAI, PEEYUSHA, KVR KUNNATHUKUZHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO. 12083/2009-O APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.187 OF 2007. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE DECREE IN O.S.187 OF 2007 OF THE SUB COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE I.A.5432/2008 IN O.S.187/2007 OF THE TRIAL OF SUBORDINATE JUDGES COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY NOTICE M44857/08/CP DATED 25/07/2008. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C). NO. 35872/2008 DATED 04/12/2008. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rs/ S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.12083 OF 2009 (O) ----------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of June, 2009 J U D G M E N T The writ petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs: i) to direct the court below to dispose of Ext.P3 petition within a time limit. ii) to issue such other writ order or direction as this Honourable Court deems fit considering the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. Petitioner is a banking concern, against which, an ex parte decree was passed in a suit which was filed by the respondent herein. The decree passed provided for realisation of court fee from the defendant, the petitioner in the present writ petition, since the respondent was permitted to sue as an indigent person. Revenue recovery proceedings for realisation of the court fee were initiated against the petitioner by the State. Petitioner approached the court which passed the decree and moved an application for setting aside the ex parte decree. He also approached this Court to keep in WPC.12083/2009 2 abeyance the revenue recovery proceedings. This Court, under Ext.P5 judgment, directed to keep in abeyance the revenue recovery proceedings for a period of three months to enable the petitioner to get disposal of his petition moved for setting aside the ex parte decree on merits, after enquiry. The grievance now raised is despite production of Ext.P5 judgment, the proceedings taken for setting aside the ex parte decree are not given due seriousness by the Sub court and it is still pending for enquiry and consideration. Meanwhile, the time granted by the Court under Ext.P5 has already expired and coercive steps are being taken by the State to realise the amount due as court fee. 3. I find notice to the respondent is not necessary on the facts and circumstances presented in the case, and therefore, it is dispensed. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that an ex parte decree happened to be passed against the Bank, because during that period, there was an amalgamation of the defendant bank in the suit with the petitioner bank and proper attention could not be given to the suit pending before the court. Whatever that be, in the light WPC.12083/2009 3 of Ext.P5 order passed by this Court, the court in which the petitioner has taken proceedings for setting aside the ex parte, should have taken note of the spirit of that order and appropriate orders on such petition should have been passed without any delay. It is submitted that the counter petitioner/plaintiff in the suit has already entered appearance in the proceedings before the Sub Court. I direct the Principal Sub Court to complete the enquiry in Ext.P4 proceedings as expeditiously as possible at any rate within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment in the present writ petition. In case, the petition is posted beyond the period for enquiry, it should be suo motu advanced with notice to the counsel on both sides and the enquiry completed and order passed within the time fixed by this Court. The writ petition is disposed with the above directions. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE prp S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. -------------------------------------------------------- CRL.R.P.NO. OF 2006 () --------------------------------------------------------- O R D E R --------------------------------------------------------- 23rd March, 2009