IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 7TH DECEMBER 2009 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 33813 of 2009(O) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN EP.107/2009 IN OS.335/1995 of PRL.M.C.,KANNUR .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- KEELTATH PUTHIYAPURAYIL SHADULI S/O.LATE K.P.MAMMEED, NANIYOOR, KOLACHERRY POST KANNUR DIST. BY ADV. SRI.T.P.PANKAJAKSHAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THAYATHUNKANDI ABDU, S/O.,PAKKER AGED 65 YEARS,KOLACHERI AMSOM,KAMBIL DESOM, RESIDING AT PANNYANKANDIYIL N.P.HOUSE. 2. C.M.MOIDEEN HAJI, S/O.MOHAMMED HAJI AGED 55 YEARS,KOLACHERY AMSOM, KAMBIL AMSOM NALAMEEDIKA. 3. C.K.PATHUMMA, W/O.IBRAHIM AGED 60 YEARS, NO OCCUPATION KOLANCHERRY AMSOM, PATTAYAM DESOM. 4. C.K.MAMEED, AGED 40 YEARS KOLANCHERRY AMSOM, PATTAYAM DESOM. 5. ALEEMA, AGED 30 YEARS KOLANCHERRY AMSOM, PATTAYAM DESOM. 6. HAMZA, AGED 28 YEARS KOLANCHERRY AMSOM, PATTAYAM DESOM. 7. AHAMMED, AGED 28 YEARS KOLANCHERRY AMSOM, PATTAYAM DESOM. 8. ABOOBACKER, AGED 22 YEARS KOLANCHERRY AMSOM, PATTAYAM DESOM. WPC.33813/09 9. NAFEESA ,AGED 21 YEARS KOLANCHERRY AMSOM, PATTAYAM DESOM. 10. SHERIFFA, AGED 24 YEARS KOLANCHERRY AMSOM, PATTAYAM DESOM. 11. KHADEEJA, AGED 17 YEARS KOLANCHERRY AMSOM, PATTAYAM DESOM. 12. P.M.ABOOBACKER, S/O.ABDU, AGED 44 YEARS TEACHER, KLANCHERY, MANIYOOR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.33813 OF 2009 (O) ----------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T The writ petition is filed seeking mainly the following relief: i. to direct the Principal Munsiff Court, Kannur to dispose E.P.No.107/2009 by executing the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.335/1995 dated 18.10.2004 within ten days. Petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.No.335 of 1995 on the file of the Principal Munsiff Court, Kannur. The relief canvassed in the writ petition is for issue of a writ/direction/order to the learned Munsiff for an expeditious completion of the execution proceedings. A report from the learned Munsiff was called for. 3. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Having regard to the submissions made and taking note of the facts WPC.33813/09 2 and circumstances presented, I find no notice to the respondents is necessary, and, hence, it is dispensed with. Grievance canvassed is that though an Amin was deputed by the court, there was resistance by the defendants and their associates in implementing the decree. Petitioner has sought for police assistance for execution of the decree. In view of the aforesaid circumstance, that application, in respect of which objections have been filed by the defendants, is awaiting orders of the court is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. Ext.P1 is the copy of the judgment rendered in the suit. Perusing Ext.P1 judgment, it is seen, suit was filed for permanent prohibitory injunction and fixation of boundary. On the basis of the report and plan prepared by an Advocate Commissioner deputed by the court, it is seen, western and northern boundaries of the plaint schedule item No.1 property had been fixed as noted in C6 plan and the rest of the reliefs canvassed in the suit had not been pressed by the plaintiff. There is no decree for putting up boundary other than fixation, which had already been done by the Advocate commissioner as shown in his plan, and was accepted by the court. When that be so, I fail to understand how on the basis WPC.33813/09 3 of the execution petition filed by the plaintiff/decree holder, orders are passed by the court as if something more is to be done for fixation of such boundary. No decree for putting up boundary nor even installing of stones in the boundary fixed had been sought for in the suit nor any such relief granted under the decree. Without taking note of these aspects, it seems, the learned Munsiff , it appears, is proceeding with the execution. Whether there is anything to be executed through court under the decree granted has to be gone into by the court before proceeding further with the request for execution on the basis of the petition filed by the petitioner/plaintiff. In the nature of the decree granted, I find no direction need be issued to the learned Munsiff as desired by the petitioner for completion of the execution proceedings. Writ petition is closed. Send a copy of the judgment to the court concerned forthwith. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE prp