IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 1ST APRIL 2011 / 11TH CHAITHRA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 1075 of 2011() ------------------------- CRL.M.P.NO.436/2011 IN CRA.109/2011 of SESSIONS COURT, THRISSUR CMP.348/2011 IN MC 5/2011 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, IRINJALAKUDA .................... PETITIONER(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------- ROSILY, W/O. JACOB, MANJALY HOUSE, ALOOR DESOM, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH CHAKYAT RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONERS -------------------------- 1. JACOB, AGED 59 YEARS, S/O. KOCHUDEVASSY, MANJALY HOUSE,ALOOR DESOM, MUKUNDAPURAM - 680 683. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR FOR R2 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.1075 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of April, 2011. ORDER Petitioner challenges exparte order of stay granted by learned Sessions Judge, Thrissur in Crl.M.P.No.436 of 2011 in Crl.Appeal.No.109 of 2011. That appeal arose from an exparte interim order passed by the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Irinjalakkuda on 12.01.2011 in M.C.No.5 of 2011 granting permission to the petitioner for residence in the disputed house and restraining the first respondent from entering the said house. First respondent filed Crl.Appeal.No.109 of 2011 and moved Crl.M.P.No.436 of 2011 before learned Sessions Judge, Thrissur. Learned Sessions Judge by Annexure-3, order dated 23.02.2011 stayed operation of exparte interim order passed by learned Judicial First Class Magistrate on C.M.P.No.348 of 2011 in M.C.No.5 of 2011 for a period of two months and directed learned Magistrate to dispose of M.C.No.5 of 2011 itself within two months. Annexure-3, order is under challenge. Learned counsel submits that there was no posting for the appeal after 23.02.2011 as per instruction given to him and that while considering the application for interim stay learned Sessions Judge should have exercised greater care and caution. Reliance is placed on the decision of this Court in Sulochana and another v. Kuttappan and others (2007 Cri.L.J. 2057). Crl.MC No.1075/2011 2 2. It is seen that learned Sessions Judge has passed an exparte interim order for a period of two months. It would appear that in the meantime petitioner is facing eviction as per Annexure-4, notice issued to her. Having regard to the circumstances it is necessary that the learned Sessions Judge heard Crl.M.P.No.436 of 2011 as early as possible and passed appropriate orders. Resultantly this petition is disposed of directing learned Sessions Judge, Thrissur to dispose of Crl.M.P.No.436 of 2011 ( in Crl.Appeal.No.109 of 2011) as early as possible having regard to the grievance of the petitioner and in the light of eviction she apprehends as per Annexure-4, notice. It is open to the petitioner to appear before learned Sessions Judge, Thrissur, prefer her objection to Crl.M.P.No.436 of 2011 and request learned Sessions Judge to advance hearing of the petition. If any such request is made learned Sessions Judge shall pass appropriate orders on the advance petition as well as Crl.M.P.No.436 of 2011 as early as possible. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks