IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 6TH JULY 2010 / 15TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).NO. 20891 OF 2010(O) ----------------------------------------- OS.45/2008 OF MUN-MAGI COURT, SASTHAMCOTTA .................... PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- BALAN, AGED 55, S/O.SANKARAN, KAPPISSERI VEETTIL, EDAKKADU MURI, PORUVAZHI VILLAGE, KUNNATHUR TALUK, KOLLAM (DT.). BY ADV. SRI.SUNNY ZACHARIA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. KADUTHAMCHERIL FAMILY TRUST, EDAKKADU MURI, PORUVAZHI VILLAGE, KUNNATHUR TALUK, KOLLAM (DT.). 2. SECRETARY, KADUTHAMCHERIL FAMILY TRUST, -DO-. 3. PRESIDENT, KADUTHAMCHERIL FAMILY TRUST, -DO-. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== W.P(C) No.20891 of 2010 ==================================== Dated this the 06th day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T As it is there are three suits – O.S. Nos.45, 220 and 275 of 2008 involving petitioner and respondents pending in the court of learned Munsiff, Sasthamcotta. Dispute appeared to be regarding a pathway referred to in O.S. No.45 of 2008 and right claimed by petitioner-plaintiff in that suit to use the said pathway without obstruction. Petitioner prayed for a declaration of his right of easement and for prohibitory injunction and moved Ext.P1(a), I.A. No.168 of 2008 for temporary injunction. Learned Principal Munsiff passed an interim order restraining respondents from committing mischief in the said way. Respondent filed O.S. No.220 of 2008 against petitioner claiming a decree for prohibitory injunction against obstructing ceremonies in the “Kavu”. Exhibit P2(a) is application for temporary injunction where Ext.P2(b), interim order of injunction is passed against petitioner. Respondent filed yet another suit – O.S. No.275 of 2008 against petitioner trespassing into the suit property and Ext.P3(a) is the application for interim injunction against petitioner. Grievance of petitioner is that applications for injunction were posted on several days, it was W.P(C) No.20891 of 2010 -: 2 :- heard and again re-posted for further hearing. According to the learned counsel applications are now posted on 03.08.2010 which are pending from 10.03.2008 onwards and the pendency of applications without passing final orders is causing much inconvenience to the petitioner. Hence a direction is sought for to the learned Munsiff to dispose of Exts.P1(a), P2(a) and P3(a), applications within a time limit to be specified. 2. It would appear that applications are pending since long without passing final orders. What exactly are the compulsions of learned Munsiff on account of heavy pendency of both civil and criminal cases and number of days available for civil work cannot be stated now. Therefore I do not propose to issue any time limit for disposal of the aforesaid applications. But considering the grievance of petitioner it is necessary that final orders are passed in the applications without further delay. Hence I direct learned Munsiff to dispose of Exts.P1(a), P2(a) and P3(a), applications as expeditiously as possible. Writ Petition is disposed of with the above direction. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv