IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 13TH AUGUST 2009 / 22ND SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 20637 of 2009(O) ------------------------------------- AS.167/2007 of DISTRICT COURT, PALAKKAD .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- VELLA, W/O.RAKKANDI, AGED 79 YEARS, SWASTHAM, MARUTHAKKUNNIL, CHALLIPARAMBU, KANNAMBRA AMSOM DESOM, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD. BY ADVS.MR.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT MR.K.N.ABHILASH SMT.R.LEELA RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. UNNIKRISHNAN, S/O.RAKKANDI, AGED 43 YEARS, MARUTHAKKUNNIL, CHALLIPARAMBU, KANNAMBRA AMSOM DESOM, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD. 2. PUSHPALATHA, W/O.UNNIKRISHNAN, AGED 35 YEARS, MARUTHAKKUNNIL, CHALLIPARAMBU, KANNAMBRA AMSOM DESOM, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVINGCOME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------- W.P.(C).No.20637 OF 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of August 2009 ------------------------------------- JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs. i) Issue appropriate directions directing the court of the District Judge of Palakkad to take up A.S No. 167 of 2007 on its files and hear and finally dispose it of as early as possible and in any event within a time frame this Hon'ble Court may deem fit. ii) Issue such other writ, order or direction that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper on the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice. W.P.(C).No.20637 OF 2009 Page numbers 2. Petitioner is the respondent in A.S No. 167 of 2007 on the file of the Second Additional District Court, Palakkad. The above appeal arises from the decree passed in a suit for mandatory injunction filed by the petitioner as plaintiff. The defendants in the suit / appellants in the appeal are the son and daughter-in-law of the petitioner. Petitioner who is stated to be now aged 78 years instituted the suit for a decree of mandatory injunction to compel the defendants to vacate from the building scheduled in the plaint. Suit after trial was decreed in her favour. In view of the pendency of the appeal preferred by the defendants and the stay orders obtained by the appellants she is prevented from enjoying the fruit of the decree, is her case. A report from the learned District Judge was called for to examine whether service in the appeal is completed and if so, could it be disposed of at an early date. It has been reported that the appeal now stands posted for hearing, but, the court in which it is pending remains vacant. Pursuant to the direction given by W.P.(C).No.20637 OF 2009 Page numbers this court, notice of the petition was served on the counsel appearing for the respondents / appellants in the appeal before the court below and a memo has been filed evidencing such service. I am satisfied that, due service has been effected on the respondents, but, they have not entered appearance. 3. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel and taking note of the facts and circumstances presented, I direct the learned District Judge, Palakkad to take back the appeal from Second Additional District Court to his court, and hear and dispose it as expeditiously as possible at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed as directed above. Sd/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE vdv