IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 9TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 18TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 31943 of 2009(O) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 22/10/2009 IN EA.323/2009 IN OS.102/1997 of ADDL.MUNSIFF COURT, KOLLAM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- SHOUKKATHUMMA @ SHOUKKATHU BEEVI 70 YEARS, D/O.RABU BEEVI, THODIYIL PURAYIDOM, THAMARAKKULAM, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.B.SURESH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- AHAMMED BASHEER, AGED 66, RANDAMKUTTI THARIFF MANZIL, CHITTADEESWARAM PURAYIDOM, AANDAMUKKAM CHERRY, KOLLAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.31943 OF 2009 (O) ----------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the 7th defendant in O.S.No.102 of 1997 on the file of the Additional Munsiff Court, Kollam. Suit was for declaration of title, possession and injunction, both prohibitory and mandatory and also for demarcation and putting up of boundaries, and the respondent was the plaintiff. Suit was dismissed by the trial court, and the present petitioner had remained ex parte. In the appeal preferred by the respondent/plaintiff, the appellate court granted a decree as against the present petitioner/7th defendant and 5th defendant in the suit to the extent of the property specified allowing recovery of such properties from those defendants. Pursuant thereof, the respondent/plaintiff moved for execution the decree. In the execution proceedings, according to the counsel for the petitioner/7th defendant, the property which WPC.31943/09 2 was allowed to be recovered from her possession was recovered and delivered over to the decree holder/respondent. Recording satisfaction of the decree, the E.P. was closed. However, later, on an application moved by the decree holder for reopening of the execution proceedings negativing the objections raised by the petitioner/7th defendant, the execution court reopened the proceedings and passed further orders on the request of the decree holder for putting up boundaries over the property delivered over under the supervision of an Advocate Commissioner. Though the petitioner has applied for issue of copies of the orders passed for the reopening of the execution proceedings and also in respect of the execution of the decree for putting up of the boundaries, such copies have not been supplied till date, but, the execution of the decree for putting up the boundary is fixed for implementation tomorrow, is the grievance canvassed for invoking the visitorial jurisdiction of this Court to issue directions/orders to the court below for supply of the copies of the orders referred to above and to keep in abeyance further proceedings of execution for a grace period as fixed by this Court. Having WPC.31943/09 3 regard to the submissions made by the counsel and taking note of the facts and circumstances, I direct the execution court to issue copies of the orders passed in the execution proceedings, if applied for, by the petitioner within a period of ten days from the date of production/receipt of a copy of this judgment. The execution court is also directed to keep in abeyance further proceedings in execution of the decree in O.S.No.102 of 1997 for a period of two weeks from the date of this judgment. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Handover a copy of the judgment to the learned counsel for the petitioner on usual terms and send a copy to the court concerned forthwith. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE prp