IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 15TH OCTOBER 2009 / 23RD ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 29214 of 2009(O) ------------------------------------- EP 613/94 IN OS.76/1970 of PRL.SUB COURT,THRISSUR .................... PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- MADHAVAN, S/O.KOTTALAPARAN, ALAPRA DESOM, PEECHI VILLAGE, THRISSUR. BY ADVS.MR.V.V.ASOKAN MR.MAHESH V.MENON RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. SAINABANU, D/O.LATE KADEEJABI AND LATE MEER HUSSAIN, VELIYANNUR DESOM, THRISSUR. 2. YASMIN, D/O.LATE KADEEJABI AND LATE MEER HUSSAIN, VELIYANNUR DESOM, THRISSUR. 3. M.MUHAMMED KHALEE, D/O.LATE KADEEJABI AND LATE MEER HUSSAIN, VELIYANNUR DESOM, THRISSUR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/10/2009 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------- W.P.(C).No.29214 OF 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of October 2009 ------------------------------------- JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs. i) Issue an appropriate writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction restraining the execution court from further proceeding with the execution proceedings pending disposal of tenancy proceeding in SM1/2005 pending before the land tribunal, Thrissur. ii) Grant such other orders as may be deemed necessary in the facts and circumstances of this case and in the interests of justice. 2. Petitioner is the 5th judgment debtor who seeks issue of a writ, order or direction to restrain the execution court from pursuing with the W.P.(C).No.29214 OF 2009 Page numbers execution proceedings in E.P No.613 of 1994 in O.S No.76 of 1970 of Sub Court, Thrissur. A suo motu proceeding in respect of the subject matter covered by the decree which is sought to be executed is pending before the Land Tribunal is the case canvassed for keeping in abeyance the execution proceedings in the above case. Some other persons have obtained stay of the execution proceedings is also canvassed as a circumstance for adjourning the delivery already ordered by the court. Having regard to the submissions made and taking note of the facts and circumstances presented, with reference to Ext.P5 order passed by the court below directing delivery of the property, I find no reason for interference with that order. Writ petition lacks merit and it is dismissed. Sd/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE vdv