IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 12TH APRIL 2011 / 22ND CHAITHRA 1933 OP (RC).No. 1516 of 2011(O) --------------------------- RCP.20/2005 of MUNSIFF COURT, NADAPURAM .................... PETITIONER(S): -------------------- PANAYULLAKANDI KUNHAMI, W/O.KUNHABDULLA, KOVUMMAL HOUSE, KUTTIADY AMSOM' OORATH DESOM, VATAKARA. BY ADV. SMT.SHAHNA KARTHIKEYAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. MUKKATH KOLLANDY ASYA HAJJUMMA D/O. ALIKUTTY,KUTTIDAY AMSOM THONDIPOYIL DESOM, VATAKARA TALUK PIN 673 508. 2. ABDUL RASHEED, S/O. MOIDU HAJI, KOODATHIL HOUSE,KUTTIDAY AMSOM OORATH DESOM, VATAKARA TALUK PIN 673 508. THIS OP (RENT CONTROL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JJ. ------------------------ O.P.(RC).No. 1516 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 12th day of April, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The landlady is the petitioner in this original petition under Article 227. According to her, the first respondent is the tenant and the 2nd respondent is the sub tenant. The landlady's case is that the first respondent filed RCP No.20/2005 against the 2nd respondent and has obtained an order of eviction. The landlady seems to be aggrieved in that the first respondent is about to evict the 2nd respondent in execution of the eviction order in RCP No.20/2005. According to the landlady, she had filed a claim petition as E.A. No.218/2010 under Order 21 Rule 97 CPC before the Execution Court and that the claim petition was dismissed by that Court. Against that order she filed A.S. No.38/2010 which was dismissed recently. The landlady submits that she intends to challenge the judgment and decree in A.S. No.38/2010. According to her, if the order of delivery passed by the Execution Court is effected even before she could challenge the judgment O.P.(RC).No.1516/2011 2 and decree in A.S. No.38/2010, she will be put to serious prejudice. 2. We are at a loss to understand how the landlady will sustain prejudice by the first respondent evicting the 2nd respondent. However, as we are informed that the order of delivery stands adjourned to 27/5/2011, we dispose of the original petition issuing the following direction to the Additional District Court, Vadakara. The Additional District Court, Vadakara will issue copy of the judgment in A.S. No.38/2010 to the petitioner (if copy application in that regard has been filed by the petitioner and the same is pending) at the earliest and at any rate before the court re-opens after the mid summer holidays. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE dpk