IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 13TH JUNE 2008 / 23RD JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 17415 of 2008(W) -------------------------- AS.36/2008 of ADDL.DISTRICT COURT-I,MAVELIKKARA OS.284/2005 of MUNSIFF COURT, MAVELIKKARA (EP 149 2007) .................... PETITIONER: ------------ P.S.JOHN , JOMMY COTTAGE (KIZHAKKADATHU VALIYAVEETTIL) THAZHAKKARA MURI, THAZHAKKARA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.A.K.HARIDAS RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. LEELAMMA, KIZHAKKADATHU VALIYAVEETTIL THAZHAKKARA MURI, THAZHAKKARA VILLAGE. MAVELIKKARA, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT 33/6 KAVERI LAYOUT, MARIYAN PALAYAM, BANGALORE. 2. BIJI VARGHESE OF KIZHAKKADATHU VALIYAVEETTIL THAZHAKKARA MURI, THAZHAKKARA VILLAGE. MAVELIKKARA, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT 33/6 KAVERI LAYOUT, MARIYAN PALAYAM, BANGALORE. 3. REJI JOHN OF KIZHAKKADATHU VALIYAVEETTIL THAZHAKKARA MURI, THAZHAKKARA VILLAGE. MAVELIKKARA, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT 33/6 KAVERI LAYOUT, MARIYAN PALAYAM, BANGALORE. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.17415 of 2008 ------------------------------- Dated this the 13th June, 2008. J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the appellant in A.S.No.36/2008, on the file of the Additional District Court, Mavelikkara. Appeal was filed with a petition under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay. This petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, for a direction the Additional District Court to serve notice on the delay petition to the counsel appearing for the respondents before the Execution Court, and also to direct adjournment of the delivery ordered in E.P.No.149/2007 for two months. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner was heard. Petitioner earlier filed C.R.P.No.423/2008 challenging the order passed by the Executing Court refusing to stay the execution, at the instance of the petitioner. That CRP was dismissed under Ext.P3 order. In Ext.P3 order, it is made clear that if grievance of the petitioner is that delay petition cannot be heard as notice on the respondents could not be served, petitioner is at liberty to approach W.P.(C) No.17415/2008 2 the appellate court for appropriate order to serve a notice on the counsel appearing for the decree holder before the Executing Court. That observation was made on the basis of the representation made by the learned counsel that plaintiffs-decree holders had already filed an execution petition through a counsel, and, therefore, notice on the respondents could be made through the said counsel. In such circumstances, it is for the petitioner to file appropriate petition before the District Judge for permission to serve notice on the counsel appearing for the respondents in the appeal before the Executing Court. If such a petition is filed, District Judge has to pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, without any delay. The writ petition is disposed as above. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE nj.