IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 24TH OCTOBER 2011 / 2ND KARTHIKA 1933 OP(C).No. 3258 of 2011(O) -------------------------------- PETITIONER/DEFENDANTS NOS. 2 TO 8. ----------------------------------------------- 1. CHOLAPURATH DR.MOHANAN, S/O.CHOLAPURAM KORU, LAKSHMI NIVAS,PAROPPADI, CHEVAYOOR AMSOM AND DESOM,KOZHIKODE. 2. CHOLAPURATH ASOKAN, S/O.CHOLAPURATH KORU, LAKSHMI NIVAS,PAROPPADI, CHEVAYOOR AMSOM AND DESOM,KOZHIKODE. 3. CHOLAPURATH DR.GOKULAN, S/O.CHOLAPURATH KORU, LAKSHMI NIVAS,PAROPPADI, CHEVAYUR AMSOM AND DESOM, KOZHIKODE. 4. CHOLAPURATH SHYLAJA RAJAGOPAL, D/O.CHOLAPURATH KORU, LAKSHMI NIVAS,PAROPPADI, CHEVAYUR AMSOM AND DESOM, KOZHIKODE. 5. CHOLAPURATH VANAJA HARIDAS, D/O.CHOLAPURATH KORU, LAKSHMI NIVAS,PAROPPADI, CHEVAYUR AMSOM AMSOM AND DESOM, KOZHIKODE 6. CHOLAPURATH RAVEENDRAN, S/O.CHOLAPURATH KORU, LAKSHMI NIVAS,PAROPPADI, CHEVAYUR AMSOM AMSOM AND DESOM, KOZHIKODE. Svs ...........2/-... ...2... OPC.3258/2011 7. CHOLAPURATH GIRIJA YASODHARAN, D/O.CHOLAPURATH KORU, LAKSHMI NIVAS,PAROPPADI, CHEVAYUR AMSOM AND DESOM, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.MOHAMMED NIAS RESPONDENT(S):1ST DEFENDANT & PLAINTIFFS --------------------------------------------------------- 1. CHOLAPURATH PRABHAKARAN, S/O.CHOLAPURATH KORU, LAKSHMI NIVAS,PAROPPADI, CHEVAYUR AMSOM AND DESOM, KOZHIKODE,CHERUVAYUR PO 673 017 2. NEDUMPRATH BASHEER, S/O.POCKER HAJI, VELLUR AMSOM,CHALAPPRAM DESOM, VATAKARA TALUK,KOZHIKODE CHALAPPURAM PO, 673 002. 3. KINARULLA PARAMBATH IBRAHIM HAJI, S/O.KUNHABDULLA IBRAHIM HAJI, MOKERI AMSOM,VATAKARA TALUK, MOKERI P.O. 673 516 4. KINARULLA PARAMBATH AMMAD, S/O.KUNHABDULLA HAJI,MOKERI AMSOM, VATAKARA TALUK MOKERI PO 673 516 REP BY POA,KINARULLA PARAMBATH IBRAHIM HAJI, S/O.KUNHABDULLA HAJI 5. CHERYA MALOL AMMAD, S/O. MOOSA, PONMERI AMSOM,PARAMBIL DESOM, VATAKARA TALUK,KOZHIKODE PONMERI P.O., 673 542. THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs O.P.(C). NO.3258/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 09.09.09 IN CRP NO.794/2008 P2: COPY OF THE I.A.NO.2150/2010 DATED 09.06.2010 FILED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER P3: COPY OF THE I.A.NO.2151/2010 DATED 09.06.2010 FILED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER P4: COPY OF THE I.A.NO.2152/2010 DATED 09.06.2010 FILED BY THE 3RD PETITIONER P5: COPY OF THE I.A.NO.2153/2010 DATED 09.06.2010 FILED BY THE 4TH PETITIONER P6: COPY OF THE I.A.NO.2154/2010 DATED 09.06.2010 FILED BY THE 5TH PETITIONER. P7: COPY OF THE I.A.NO.2155/2010 DATED 09.06.2010 FILED BY THE 6TH PETITIONER P8: COPY OF THE I.A.NO.2156/2010 DATED 09.06.2010 FILED BY THE 7TH PETITIONER P9: COPY OF THE COUNTER STATEMENT IN I.A.NO.2150/2010 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT NOS.2 TO 5 P10: COPY OF THE COUNTER STATEMENT IN I.A.NO.2151/2010 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT NOS 2 TO 5. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- O.P(C).No.3258 of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this 24th day of October, 2011 JUDGMENT Petitioners are defendants 2 to 8 in O.S.No.259 of 2005 of the Court of learned Second Additional Sub Judge, Kozhikdoe. A decree for specific performance was passed in favour of respondent 2 to 5 and the documents were to be executed in two phases. This proceeding concerns the amount deposited by respondents 2 to 5 being the part of sale consideration for execution of the sale deed in the second phase. Petitioners filed Exts.P2 to P8, applications for issue of cheques for the proportionate amount due to them in the property sold in the second phase. Grievance of petitioners is that the said applications are pending since long, it is not disposed of so far. 2. It is pointed out by learned counsel that this Court had as per Ext.P16, judgment dated December 09, 2010 in O.P (C).No.1060 of 2010 directed the learned Sub Judge to expedite disposal of Exts.P2 to P8, applications if those applications are otherwise in order as early as possible giving it top priority. But in spite of that, said applications are not so far disposed of. O.P(C).No.3258 of 2011 -: 2 :- 3. I have obtained a report from the learned Second Additional Sub Jude in the matter. Learned Sub Judge has reported that he took charge as second Additional Sub Judge only on 23.05.2011 and that the direction in Ext.P16, judgment was not brought to his notice on time. It is also reported that so far as the claim made by petitioners under Exts.P2 to P8 are concerned, respondents 2 to 5/plaintiffs filed I.A.No.276 of 2010 requesting that `.17,133/- be disbursed to them being the building tax payable by petitioners in respect of the property in question. It is also reported that later, respondents 2 to 5 filed application (I.A.No.5041 of 2010) to direct the State to submit affidavit showing the further amount if any due to the Government from the petitioners and that verification of the records revealed that the Tahsildar (RR), Kozhikode had submitted two statements of account dated 04.11.2010 and 02.02.2011 as per which the amounts due to the Government is `.24,90,631/- and `.14,91,511/-, respectively. Respondents 2 to 5 filed yet another application, I.A.No.276 of 2010 praying that further direction may be given to the State to file fresh statement of account showing the amount due and accordingly the State was directed to file fresh statement and that petition was posted on O.P(C).No.3258 of 2011 -: 3 :- 19.10.2011. 4. Learned Sub Judge has requested time to dispose of Exts.P2 to P8, applications in the light of the claims made by respondents 2 to 5 and in the circumstances above stated. 5. Having heard learned counsel, I am inclined to issue a direction but, I am not fixing any time limit having regard to the nature of contentions which respondents 2 to 5 have raised and which learned Sub Judge is required to adjudicate. Resultantly this original petition is disposed of directing the learned Sub Judge to dispose of Exts.P2 to P8, applications as provided under law after taking into account objections/claims of respondents 2 to 5 as provided under law, as early as possible giving it priority. (THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-