IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2009 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 33373 of 2009(O) -------------------------- OS.6/1995 of SUB COURT,NEYYATTINKARA .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. GOPINATHAN NAIR S/O.VASUDEVAN NAIR, AGED 55 YEARS, CHENNACKAL VEEDU, VENGANOOR DESOM, VIZHINJAM VILLAGE, TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT. 2. VILASINI AMMA, W/O.GOPINATHAN NAIR AGED 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT DO...DO... BY ADV. SRI.J.S.AJITHKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. LALITHA, W/O.LATE SUDARSANAN NADAR DARSANA, VENGANOOR DESOM,VIZHINJAM VILLAGE TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT. 2. RAHUL, S/O. SUDARSANAN NADAR DO...DO.. 3. RAJEEV, S/O. SUDARSANAN NADAR DO..DO.. 4. YATHEENDRARAJ, S/O.SUKU, P.S.BHAVAN MUKUNDARA DESOM, KALLIKKAD VILLAGE TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.33373 OF 2009 -------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of December 2009 ---------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT Petitioners are the decree holders in O.S No. 6 of 1995 on the file of the Sub court, Neyyattinkara. Suit was one for declaration of title and for mandatory injunction, and the respondents are the defendants. Suit was decreed in favour of the plaintiffs. An appeal preferred by the defendants was also dismissed. However, while disposing the appeal, this court has directed the execution court to explore the possibility of a settlement between the parties. The court below, in the execution proceedings, taking note of the directions given by this court in the judgment in the appeal as referred to above, referred the parties to the Lok Adalath. The grievance espoused by the petitioner is that there was total noncooperation from the defendants for settlement and, in fact, there is no chance for any settlement. It is further submitted that before the Adalath also he has filed a statement on behalf of the decree holders that there is no chance for any settlement. However the proceedings in execution are being dragged on without any W.P.(C).No.33373 OF 2009 Page numbers end on the premise that the matter is pending before the Adlath is the grievance canvassed for issue of a writ/direction/order to the execution court to complete the proceedings as expeditiously as possible. 2. I called for a report from the learned Sub Judge. It is reported that a claim petition has been filed by a third party and it is pending consideration. It is further reported that in compliance with the directions of this court in the judgment in appeal, the parties have been referred to the Adalath and the report from the Adalath is still awaiting. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on reference of the case to the Adalath, there was no appearance by the respondents, and the petitioners had also filed a statement that no settlement was possible in the case. Ext.P4 is stated to be the copy of the statement filed before the Adalath. It is further submitted that the Adalath taking note of the nonappearance of the respondents and also the statement filed by the petitioners returned the records to the court below. However, on the next posting date, it is submitted, the court again referred the matter to the Adalath for settlement. In view of the order so passed W.P.(C).No.33373 OF 2009 Page numbers by the court below, the learned counsel submits that the execution proceedings and also the proceedings on the claim petition are unnecessarily delayed and the petitioners are prevented from enjoying the fruits of the decree passed in their favour. In case the Adalath had returned the records reporting that there was nonappearance of the respondents, there was no need for the court to refer the matter again to the Adalath as there had been sufficient compliance of the order passed by this court to explore the possibility of settlement as directed in the judgment rendered in the appeal. The court below is directed to expediate the enquiry on the claim petition and dispose it of in accordance with law after hearing both sides. Having regard to the facts and circumstances involved, I direct the court below to complete the proceedings on the claim petition within four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this judgment, and then, subject to the result in the claim petition, complete the execution proceedings. Sd/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, //TRUE COPY// JUDGE vdv P.A TO JUDGE