IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 24TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No.33293 of 2008 (L) --------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN EP.34/2008 IN OS.1172/2005 of ADDL.M.C.,IRINJALAKUDA .................... PETITIONER: --------------- MOHANDAS, S/O. PUTHENVEETIL KALYANIKUTTY AMMA, IRINJALAKUDA VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR RESPONDENT: ---------------- MOHANDAS, S/O. KAKKERY APPUKUTTAN, AKSHYA, IRINJALAKUDA VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. ADV. SRI.K.S.BHARATHAN FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.33293 of 2008 (L) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS:- EXT.P1:- TRUE COPY OF THE DECREE IN O.S.1172/05 DT.30/06/07 OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF COURT, IRINJALAKUDA. EXT.P2:-TRUE COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION, E.P.34/08 IN O.S.1172/05 DT.09/07/08. EXT.P3:- TRUE COPY OF E.A.1378/08 DT.28/10/08. EXT.P4:- TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR ADVANCE THE HEARING. //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE K.P.BALACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------------------------ W. P. C. No.33293 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 24th day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT This Writ Petition has been filed by the decree holder complaining that he has filed Ext.P2 execution petition on 09/01/08 and has filed Ext.P3 application for assistance of Amin and the case having been posted on a much later date he filed Ext.P4 application for advancing the case; that Ext.P3 and Ext.P4 were filed on 28/10/08, but even Ext.P4 petition seeking advancing of the case is posted to 04/12/08 and that the case is one wherein for three and a half years licence fee is not being paid by the judgment debtor for the shop in his occupation. Judgment debtor has entered appearance. It is submitted by counsel for the judgment debtor that A.S.148/08 is filed before the Sub Court, Irinjalakuda assailing Ext.P1 decree with a petition to condone the delay in filing the appeal and also a stay petition and the stay petition as also a petition to condone the delay was heard and stands posted for orders to W. P. C. No.33293 of 2008 -2- 26/11/08. In the circumstances, it does not appear to be proper to give any further direction to the court below to advance hearing. However, it is made clear that in case the delay condonation petition is dismissed and/or stay is refused by the first appellate court, the execution court shall order removal of articles in the shop in compliance with Ext.P1 decree so as to enable the decree holder to take back possession of the scheduled shop room on 04/12/08. With this direction, I dispose of this Writ Petition. Issue copy urgently to the counsel for the petitioner/decree holder. K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JUDGE kns/-