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. 3419 of 2011(O) ------------------------- PETITIONERS --------------------- T.K.RADHAKRISHNAN, RAJESH BHAVAN, GURU NAGAR-79, KALLUMTHAZHAM P.O., KILIKOLLOOR CHERRY, KILIKOLLOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.SIVARAJ RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. SUNANDA, W/O. DEVARAJAN, POOVANGAL VEEDU, KUNNIMEL CHERRY, KILIKOLLOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM. 691001 2. MANOJ, S/O. DEVARAJAN, POOVANGAL VEEDU, K UNNIMEL CHERRY, KILIKOLLOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM.691001 3. SARITHA, D/O. DEVARAJAN, POOVANGAL VEEDU, KUNNIMEL CHERRY, KILIKOLLOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM.691001 4. JEEJA DEVI, W/O. SOMARAJAN, POOVANGAL VEEDU, KUNNIMEL CHERRY, KILIKOLLOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM.691001 5. SOMY SOMARAJAN, D/O. SOMARAJAN, POOVANGAL VEEDU, KUNNIMEL CHERRY, KILIKOLLOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM.691001 6. KARTHIK, S/O. SOMARAJAN, POOVANGAL VEEDU, KUNNIMEL CHERRY, KILIKOLLOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM.691001 7. SANTHA DEVI, W/O. DEVARAJAN, POOVANGAL VEEDU, KUNNIMEL CHERRY, KILIKOLLOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM.691001 8. DEVADETHA SREEDHARAN, W/O. SREEDHARAN, DEVA DETHA BHAVAN, VADAYATHUKOTTA, KOLLAM.691001 THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VK OP(C).No. 3419 of 2011(O) -------------------------------------- APPENDIX --------------- PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS ----------------------------------- EXT.P1. APPLICATION DATED 7.7.2003 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE LAND TRIBUNAL, TRIVANDRUM UNDER SEC. 72 OF THE KERALA LAND REFORMS ACT ALONG WITH THE REPORT OF THE REVENUE INSPECTOR. EXT.P2. COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 24.9.2003 OF TH VILLAGE OFFICER, KILIKOLLUR. EXT.P3. COPY OF TAX RECEIPTS DATED 24.102000 EXT.P4. COPY OF THE CLAIM APPLICATIN DATED 3.11.08 EA 723/08 IN E.P. 22/08. EXT.P5. COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24.8.2011 IN RESTORATION APPLICATION E.A. 332/11 IN E.A. NO.723/08 IN EP. 22/08 IN O.S. 182/83. EXT.P6. COPY OF THE CMA 47/11 DATED 1.9.11 PENDING BEFORE THE DISTRICT COURT, KOLLAM. EXT.P7. COPY OF THE IA 1466/11 IN C.M.A. 47/11 DATED 1.9.11. EXT.P8. COPY F THE COMPLAINT DATED 18.102011 FILED BEFORE THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, KOLLAM EXT.P9. SERIES: PHOTOGRPHS. EXT.P10 COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED IN AUGUST 2011. EXT.P11 COPY OF INJUNCTION APPLICATION ALONG AFFIDAVIT FILED IN SMP 36/2007 IN OCT. 2011. EXT.P12. COPY OF MAHAZAR AND REPORT PREPRED BY THE ADV. COMMISSIONER IN SMP 36/2007. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL -------------------------------------- / TRUE COPY / P.A. TO JUDGE VK THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- O.P(C).No.3419 of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this 24th day of October, 2011 JUDGMENT Petitioner, claiming to be a tenant entitled to fixity of tenure of the decree schedule property involved in E.P.No.22 of 2008 in O.S.No.182 of 1983 of the Court of learned Sub Judge, Kollam filed application under Rules 97 and 98 of Order XXI of he Code of Civil Procedure (for short, "the Code”) but, that application was dismissed for default. Petitioner filed an application for restoration of that application but, it was dismissed under Rule 106(I) of Order XXI of the Code. That order is challenged before learned District Judge, Kollam in C.M.A.No.47 of 2011 (Ext.P6). Petitioner filed Ext.P7, application for stay. In the meantime, it is said that respondents took symbolic possession of the property on 06.09.2011. On 18.10.2011 respondents are said to have trespassed into the suit property and committed waste. The prayer in this original petition is to direct learned District Judge to dispose of Exts.P6 and P7, appeal and application and in the meantime restrain respondents from committing waste in the suit property. Learned counsel requested to direct respondents maintain status quo with respect to the suit property. O.P(C).No.3419 of 2011 -: 2 :- 2. Since the C.M appeal is pending in the Court of learned District Judge it is for that Court to consider the grievance of petitioner. I am not inclined to think that at this stage, this Court should pass any order referring to the merit of the case. But, Ext.P6, C.M appeal and Ext.P7, application for stay are to be disposed of as early as possible if steps on that appeal and application are over and there is no legal impediment in its disposal. Resultantly this original petition is disposed of directing the learned District Judge (or such other Court before which C.M.A.No.47 of 2011 is pending) to dispose of the said C.M appeal and at any rate Ext.P7, application for stay as early as possible, having regard to the grievance of petitioner as provided under law if preliminary steps on that appeal and applications are over and there is no legal impediment in its disposal. Sd/- (THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-