IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI FRIDAY, THE 9TH OCTOBER 2009 / 17TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 28545 of 2009(R) -------------------------- OP.174/2004 of FAMILY COURT, THIRUVALLA .................... PETITIONER: --------------- KAMALAMMA, AGED 65 YEARS,W/O.VISWANATHA PANICKER, KALATHILATHU VEEDU,CHENGAROOR KARA, KALLOOPPARA VILLAGE,MALLAPPALLY. BY ADV. SRI.S.PRAKASH RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. SANGEETHA NAIR, AGED 25 YEARS,D/O.SOMASEKHARAN NAIR, UPASANA VEEDU,NATTASSERY KARA,VIJAYAPURAM, MUTTAMBALAM VILLAGE,KOTTAYAM 686 001. 2. SANTHOSH KUMAR, AGED 34 YEARS,S/O.VISWANATHA PANICKER, KALATHILATTU VEEDU,CHENGAROOR KARA, KALLOOPPARA VILLAGE,MALLAPPALY TALUK, PIN:689 584. 3. VISWANATHA PANICKER, AGED 72 YEARS, -DO- -DO- THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C. HARI RANI,JJ ============================== W.P.(C)NO. 28545 OF 2009 ============================ DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2009 JUDGMENT Basant,J. The petitioner is one of the three judgment debtors in a proceedings before the Family Court. The first respondent is the decree holder. The first respondent has initiated steps in execution. Steps are taken by the execution court for sale of an item of property belonging to the petitioner and others pending. According to the petitioner, she has only fractional rights in that property. Ext.P2 claim petition is filed on 7-8-2009 which is pending. She has filed Ext.P3 petition to review an order. Before disposal of Exts.P2 and P3, the learned Judge of the Family Court is now proceeding with further steps in execution for sale of the property, contends the petitioner. The petitioner, in these circumstances, has come to this court for issue of appropriate directions. WPC.28545/2009 -2- 2. We do not think it necessary that any specific directions need be issued. If the petitioner has a grievance that those petitions are to be considered, she has to make appropriate request before the Execution Court for disposal of such petition. We have no reason to assume that the learned Judge of the Family Court will not follow procedure in accordance with law and shall proceed to dispose of the property by sale in execution before considering the relevant objections. 3. In these circumstances, this writ petition is dismissed. Needless to say, the petitioner can make her representation before the Execution Court and the Execution Court shall proceed only in accordance with law and further steps in execution shall be taken only after dealing with the grievances of the petitioner. 4. With the above observations, this writ petition is dismissed. R. BASANT, JUDGE ks. M.C. HARI RANI,JUDGE WPC.28545/2009 -3- ks.