IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2010 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1932 WP(C).No. 11037 of 2010(O) -------------------------- EP NO.78 /2009 IN OS.663/1988 of PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT-I, KOZHIKODE .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- KURIAKOSE, KADUMKEERIL HOUSE, KOODATHAYI AMSOM, PALONA DESOM, KZOHIKODE TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.G.UNNIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- ABRAHAM, KADUMKEERIL, KOODATHAYI AMSOM, PALONA DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. ADV. SRI.M.KRISHNAKUMAR SMT.PRABHA R.MENON THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO.11037/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 26.6.95 IN OS 663/1988 OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT KOZHIKODE EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF EP NO.78/2009 IN OS 663/1988 OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, KOZHIKODE DATED 12.2.2009 EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF EA NO.71/2010 IN EP 78/2009 OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, KOZHIKODE DATED 10.2.2010 //TRUE COPY// THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.11037 of 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of May, 2010. JUDGMENT Respondent's father obtained a decree for prohibitory injunction against trespass. After the death of the father, respondent as the legal representative launched execution against petitioner alleging that there was willful disobedience of the decree for prohibitory injunction. There was some laches on the part of petitioner in appearing in court. Hence executing court awarded Rs.500/- by way of cost which has already been paid by petitioner. In the meantime, respondent was examined but he was not cross-examined by petitioner. On 06.03.2010 executing court ordered that respondent is present, he is not cross-examined by petitioner and posted the case for evidence of petitioner on 03.04.2010. Petitioner is aggrieved by that order and has filed this Writ Petition. Though, certain other grounds are also urged in the Writ Petition, learned counsel for petitioner has confined his contention in the Writ Petition to getting an opportunity to cross- examine respondent and adduce his evidence. I have heard counsel on both sides. Having regard to the facts and circumstances I am inclined to grant opportunity to the petitioner to cross- examine respondent and adduce evidence. Resultantly this Writ Petition is allowed in the following lines: WP(C) No.11037/2010 2 i. Order dated 06.03.2010 passed by the executing court in E.P.No.78 of 2009 in O.S.No.663 of 1988 is set aside. ii. Petitioner will be given opportunity to cross-examine respondent and adduce his evidence. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks