IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 14TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 23RD BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 197 of 2010(O) ------------------------ OS.795/1991 of PRL.MUNSIFF COURT, PALAKKAD .................... PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. VISHWANATHAN, S/O. LATE LAKSHMANA MESTRI, KAVUNGAL VEEDU, THENOOR AMSOM, PALAKKAD. 2. BHASKARAN, S/O. LATE LAKSHMANA MESTRI, KAVUNGAL VEEDU, THENOOR AMSOM, PALAKKAD. 3. LALITHA, D/O. LATE LAKSHMANA MESTRI, KAVUNGAL VEEDU, THENOOR AMSOM, PALAKKAD. 4. KUMARI, D/O. LATE LAKSHMANA MESTRI, KAVUNGAL VEEDU, THENOOR AMSOM, PALAKKAD. 5. NALINI, D/O. LATE LAKSHMANA MESTRI, KAVUNGAL VEEDU, THENOOR AMSOM, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE SRI.N.SASI RESPONDENT: --------------- SANTHA, D/O. LATE CHAMI, KARUKODI PALAYAM, VADAKKANTHRA AMSOM, PALAKKAD. ADV. SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 197 of 2010 APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 : DECREE IN O.S.No.795 OF 1991 DTD. 11-02-1992 EXHIBIT P2 : ORDER IN E.A.No.92 OF 2006 DTD. 30.10.2007 EXHIBIT P3 : ORDER IN 1229 OF 2007 DTD 11.04.2008 RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL True Copy P.A to Judge THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.C.No.197 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this 14th day of September, 2010 ORDER This writ petition is filed by the judgment debtors in E.P.No.141 of 2004 in O.S.No.795 of 1991 of the court of learned Principal Munsiff, Palakkad. For the amount due to the respondent under the decree, property belonging to the petitioners was brought up for sale and sold in auction. There was an application to set aside the sale but that application was dismissed for default by Ext.P2, order. Petitioners then filed application to restore that application which was allowed on terms of cost but cost was not paid. Hence by Ext.P3, order application for restoration was also dismissed. In effect, order of sale has become final and pursuant to that, the sale was confirmed. Execution petition was posted for delivery of the property. At that stage petitioners filed this writ petition seeking a direction to the learned Principal Munsiff to keep in abeyance proceedings in E.P.No.141 of 2004 till such time as deemed fit and proper to enable petitioners to settle their liability. After appearance of respondents matter was sent to the Adalath for settlement. But, no settlement could be arrived. Thus the matter is back in this court. W.P.C.No.197 of 2010 : 2 : 2. Now that sale has been confirmed after dismissal of the application to set aside the sale what remained is only delivery of property. In spite of petitioners getting sufficient time they have not so far settled the matter. Hence request made in this writ petition cannot be allowed. Resultantly this writ petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed. Dismissal of this writ petition will not stand in the way of parties settling the dispute and purchaser re-conveying the property to the petitioners. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-