IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 26TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 OP(C).No. 871 of 2010(O) ------------------------ OS.136/1995 of SUB COURT, SULTHAN BATHERY .................... PETITIONER: ----------------------- KUNIMAL PADMAKSHI, W/O.LATE CHANDRAN, AGED 71 YEARS, RESIDING AT ROSHNI, KANDAMKUNNU AMSOM, KALDERI DESOM, NEERVAL P.O. NIRAMALAGIR (VIA), KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.NAGARESH SRI.SHAJI THOMAS PORKKATTIL SRI.BINU PAUL SRI.T.V.VINU RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. MADAVOOR MAMUKKUTTY, RESIDING AT MANJAPPARA, NARIKUNDU P.O., AMBALAVAYAL AMSOM DESOM, SULTHANBATHERY TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT - 673593. 2. A.P. HAMSA, RESIDING AT ULIKKAL HOUSE, NARIKUNDU P.O., AMBALAVAYAL AMSOM DESOM, SULTHANBATHERY TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT-673593. 3. K.SAINABA, RESIDING AT KANAKKAYIL HOUSE, NARIKUNDU P.O., AMBALAVAYAL AMSOM, DESOM, SULTHANBATHERY TALUK, WAYAND DISTRICT - 673593. 4. P.MUHAMMAD, RESIDING AT PUTHANPURAYIL, NARIKUNDU P.O., AMBALAVAYAL AMSOM DESOM, SULTHANBATHERY TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT-673593. 5. K.SAFIA, RESIDING AT PUTHANPURAYIL HOUSE, NARIKUNDU P.O., AMBALAVAYAL AMSOM DESOM, SULTHAN BATHERY TALUK, WAYAND DISTRICT 6. C.KUMARAN, RESIDING AT CHANDHAMAKKAL HOUSE, NARIKUNDU P.O., AMBALAVAYAL AMSOM DESOM, SULTHANTHERY TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT - 673593. THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- O.P(C).No.871 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this 26th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT Notice to respondents is dispensed with in view of the order I propose to pass. 2. Petitioner before me is the plaintiff in O.S.No.136 of 1995 of the court of learned Sub Judge, Sulthan Bathery. She claimed that her husband was the owner in possession of 4.25 acres but, he is not heard of since 1976 and hence presumed dead. Respondent No.1 was the care taker of the said property engaged by her husband. Later, petitioner filed the suit for a mandatory injunction to avoid respondent No.1 from the care takership. The Advocate Commissioner submitted report stating that certain other persons are in possession of portions of suit property. Thereon petitioner sought amendment of plaint and to remit report of the Advocate Commissioner. The suit was dismissed for default and later restored as per judgment in C.M.A.No.2 of 2010. On 17-09- 2010 petitioner's applications for amendment of plaint was allowed. Application to remit report of the Advocate Commissioner was dismissed by Ext.P4, order. In the meantime, learning that some of the persons who are in unlawful possession of the property have obtained purchase certificates from the Land Tribunal behind the back of petitioner, she filed appropriate applications before the O.P(C).No.871of 2010 : 2 : Land Tribunal to get the copy of relevant documents to be produced in the suit. Now the suit is posted for trial in the list on 01-12-2010. In this petition challenge is to Ext.P4, order and there is also prayer to direct learned Sub Judge to postpone trial of the suit so that petitioner is able to produce relevant documents. At the time of hearing learned counsel submitted that Ext.P4, order is not being challenged in this proceeding. Learned counsel submitted that time may be granted to the petitioner to produce relevant documents. Learned counsel states that petitioner is aged 72 years, there is nobody to help her and hence she finds it difficult to get the documents before the case is taken up for trial on 01-12-2010. 3. True suit is of the year 1995 and it must have its logical conclusion without further delay. But having regard to the fact that application of amendment to implead additional defendants was allowed only on 17-09-2010 and thereafter she learned about the proceedings of the Land Tribunal allegedly without notice to her, I am inclined to give some time to the petitioner to produce relevant documents. Hence, learned Sub Judge is directed to post the case for trial after forty five (45) days from 01-12-2010. Petitioner shall not ask for any further time for trial of the suit on any account. This petition is disposed of as above. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-