IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH DECEMBER 2009 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 36583 of 2009(O) -------------------------- AS.92/2008 of SUB COURT, KASARAGOD OS.319/2007 of PRL.MUNSIFF, KASARAGOD .................... PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER: --------------- M.KUNHIRAMAN, AGED 49 YEARS, SON OF PUTHARIAN, BEDICHAL OF THEKKIL VILLAGE AND POST, KASARAGOD. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER SMT.K.A.SANJEETHA RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. MUSTAFA, SON OF LATE ABDUL LATHEEF, NAIMARMOOLA OF MUTTATHODY, KASARAGOD. 2. ASLAM, DO-DO- THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.36583 OF 2009 () ----------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the appellant in A.S.No.92 of 2008 on the file of the Sub Court, Kasaragod. The above appeal is preferred against the decree and judgment rendered in O.s.No.319 of 2007 field by the petitioner. That suit for perpetual prohibitory injunction after trial was dismissed. With the appeal petitioner has moved an application for interim injunction against the respondent. No order was passed on that application. The appeal, it is submitted, had been heard and await disposal. Meanwhile, respondents are tampering with the property by making attempts to put up a construction is the grievance canvassed by the petitioner for issue of a direction to them to maintain statusquo till the disposal of the appeal by the court below. 2. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Having WPC.36583/09 2 regard to the submissions made and taking note of the facts and circumstances presented, I find no notice to the respondents is necessary, and, hence, it is dispensed with. The learned counsel of the petitioner submitted the appeal was heard on 11.12.2009, and now posted for judgment. Since the appeal has already been heard, I find at this stage, no direction need be issued as requested for by the petitioner. However, there will be a direction to the learned Sub Judge to dispose the appeal as expeditiously as possible, preferably before the closing of the courts on Christmas Vacation, and, if for any reason, it is impracticable, then dispose it on or before 10th January, 2009. Subject to the above direction, the writ petition is disposed. Handover a copy of the judgment to the learned counsel for the petitioner on usual terms and send a copy of the judgment to the court concerned forthwith. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE prp