IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 1ST FEBRUARY 2008 / 12TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 3803 of 2008(C) ------------------------- OS.492/2003 of MUNSIFF COURT, KARUNAGAPPALLY .................... PETITIONER: -------------------- VIJAYAN PILLAI, S/O. VASUDEVAN PILLAI, VIJAYA MANDIRAM, PALACKAL MURI, THEVALAKKARA, KARUNAGAPPALLY, REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER V.THULASEEDHARAN PILLAI, VIJAYA MANDIRAM PALACKAL, THEVALAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL SRI.SAIJU. S SRI.T.R.SUGUNAN RESPONDENT: ---------------------- T.SREEPRAKASH, S/O. THANKAPPAN PILLAI, SREE BHAVAN, PALACKAL, THEVALAKKARA, KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.C. NO. 3803 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 1st day of February, 2008. J U D G M E N T This writ petition is filed almost with five prayers. One is to quash further proceedings for proclamation of sale and for further proceeding in E.P.312/06 in O.S.493/03. A brief reference to the facts is absolutely necessary for deciding this case. 2. The writ petitioner is the defendant in O.S.492/03 of the Munsiff Court, Karunagapally. There was a decree for Rs.95,000/- passed against him. It was an exparte decree. Thereafter it is submitted that the present petitioner who is the power of attorney holder got the information regarding the judgment and decree passed in 2003, only on 8.2.2006 when he applied for some encumbrance certificate. Thereafter the petitioner filed I.A.479/06 before the Munsiff Court, Karunagapally under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC to set aside Exts.P1 and P2 by filing Exts.P3 and P4 applications. Both those applications were dismissed for non-prosecution. W.P.C 3803 OF 2008 -:2:- Thereafter the sale was conducted on 4.11.05. Then the petitioner filed an application under Section 47 read with S.151 CPC for declaring the sale and confirmation as void abinitio. There also the writ petitioner did not appear and it was dismissed for default. In the absence of the petitioner the Court below dismissed the matter on 22.3.07. It is averred that the petitioner came to know about such a dismissal only on 28.1.08 and thereafter has come forward with this writ petition as well as another two applications filed before the executing Court as E.A.29/08 for restoration of that application. Extraction of these facts will conclusively reveal the callous, negligence and the grave misconduct committed by the party. In such a case jurisdiction under Article 227 cannot be exercised and therefore I decline to exercise my jurisdiction and dismiss the writ petition. If the petitioner succeeds in the applications filed his remedy is always there under Section 144 CPC. Therefore the writ petition is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-