IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND DECEMBER 2009 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 27224 of 2009(O) -------------------------- CMA.10/2009 of SUB COURT, NEDUMANGAD OS.409/2009 of PRL.MUNSIFF COURT,NEDUMANGAD .................... PETITIONER: --------------- NASIM,S/O.ABDUL AZEEZ,RESIDING AT AZIF MANZIL,MADANADA,VADAKKEVILA VILLAGE,KOLLAM DIST. BY ADV. MR.HARISH GOPINATH RESPONDENT: --------------- KUMARI,D/O.SUBHADRA,PARAYANVILAKATHU VEEDU,THACHANCODE,VINOBINEKETHAN,THOLICODE VILLAGE NEDUMANGAD. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.27224 of 2009 - O --------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the judgment debtor in E.P.No.303 of 2007 in O.S.No.409 of 1997 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Kollam. The decree in the above suit was passed in a suit for money by the Munsiff Court, Nedumangad and the execution thereof was transferred to the Munsiff Court, Kollam since the judgment debtor is working in a public office at that place. Pursuant to steps taken in execution, at present an order of attachment at the rate of Rs.3,000/- from the salary of the petitioner to satisfy the decree debt continues to be in force. That attachment order has been directed to be kept in abeyance by orders passed by this Court. The case of the petitioner is that the decree was passed exparte against him without issuing summons of the suit. He had moved an application for setting aside the exparte order with a petition to condone delay, but, that was declined by the learned Munsiff, Nedumangad. Against the dismissal of that application he has filed an appeal as C.M.A.No.10 of 2009 before the Sub Court, Nedumangad. The only relief canvassed in the writ petition is for issuing a writ/direction/order to the Sub Court, Nedumangad for an expeditious hearing and disposal of that appeal. W.P.(C).No.27224 of 2009 - O 2 2. Notice was ordered to be given on the counsel appearing for the respondent in the court below with a direction to file a memo. Accordingly, a memo has been filed evidencing service of notice on such respondent. The respondent, however has not entered appearance. 3. I heard the counsel for the petitioner. 4. Having regard to the submissions made and taking note of the facts and circumstances presented, I direct the learned Sub Judge to give top priority for the hearing and disposal of C.M.A.No.10 of 2009, provided, service on the respondent has been effected in the appeal. Order passed earlier for keeping in abeyance the attachment order shall stand vacated. No further direction is called for in the writ petition, and it is closed. Send a copy of the judgment to the Munsiff Court, Kollam, and Sub Court, Nedumangad. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. bkn/-