IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 21ST NOVEMBER 2008 / 30TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No.34458 of 2008 (B) ---------------------------------- OS.759/2007 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONERS: ----------------- 1. JOJO P. GEORGE, “PRATHEEKSHA”, KRA-A-5 A, KURAVANKONAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. JANCY JOJO, “PRATHEEKSHA”, KRA-A-5 A, KURAVANKONAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. HARI PANIKKAR, LOTTUS GARDENS, PANICKER'S LANE, SASTHAMANGALAM VILLAGE, THIRUVANATHAPURAM 695 010 2. CHITHRA PANIKKAR,. NO. 461, 8TH MAIN, IIIRD STATE, BASAVAESHWARA NAGAR, BANGALORE 79. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.P.BALACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------------------------ W. P. C. No.34458 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 21st day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioners are the defendants in O.S.759/07 on the file of the II Additional Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram and the respondents are the plaintiffs therein. The prayer in this Writ Petition is to direct the II Additional Sub Judge, Thiruvananthapuram to consider and dispose of I.A.5769/07 in O.S.759/07 filed by the respondents on merits taking into account also Ext.P5 objections filed by them as expeditiously as possible and within a time limit to be fixed by this Court. 2. Considering the nature of the order that I propose to pass in this Writ Petition, I dispense with notice to the respondents. 3. Ext.P1 is the plaint in the suit. The said suit is one for a decree for mandatory injunction W. P. C. No.34458 of 2008 -2- directing the petitioners/defendants to restore lateral support to 'A' Schedule property that was available from 'B' schedule property and which was destroyed by them at the cost of the defendants themselves and for a prohibitory injunction restraining them from alienating 'B' schedule property. On the application of the respondents, the trial court issued Ext.P3 order of interim prohibitory injunction on Ext.P2 application restraining the counter petitioners who are petitioners herein from alienating the 'B' schedule property to anyone else without reconstructing the eastern compound wall of plaint 'A' schedule property and restoring the lateral support. The petitioners filed Ext.P5 objection to the said injunction petition. The grievance of the petitioners that is highlighted before me by the counsel for the petitioners is that though W. P. C. No.34458 of 2008 -3- objection was filed on 15/02/08 to I.A.5769/07 when it stood posted for objections, it was adjourned for hearing to 27/06/08 after four months and from that date it was adjourned to 10/10/08 and thereafter to 23/01/09 without vacating the ex parte interim injunction or passing considered final orders thereon. 4. It is submitted that Ext.P6 written statement was also filed on 15/11/08 though it had not been filed on 27/06/08 as represented or on 10/10/08, the adjourned date, but with a petition to receive the same. However, what the petitioner wants is to expedite disposal of the injunction petition and to have orders passed thereon on merits. 5. In the result, I direct the court below to consider the injunction application filed in O.S.759/07 advancing its hearing on a motion made W. P. C. No.34458 of 2008 -4- by the petitioners/defendants in that behalf and to pass appropriate orders thereon on merits before closing of the courts for Christmas holidays. The petitioner is directed to produce a copy of this judgment along with the advance petition that he is to file in the court below with notice to counsel for the respondents/ plaintiffs to enable the court to take appropriate action as directed above. 6. Issue copy of this judgment to the counsel for the petitioner urgently. K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JUDGE kns/-