IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 16TH DECEMBER 2011 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 OP(C).NO. 4150 OF 2011(O) ------------------------------------------- OS.75/2005 OF MUNSIFF COURT,KAYAMKULAM PETITIONER: -------------------- GOPALAKRISHNA PILLAI,AGED 62 YEARS, S/O.SANKARA KURUP,MARUTHAVANA VEETTIL, KATTANAM VILLAGE,PALLICKAL.P.O,MAVELIKKARA. BY ADV. SMT.ANITHA M.N. (EKM) SRI.SUNI M.D. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR,ALAPPUZHA-688001. 2. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,CHENGANNUR, PIN-689121. 3. TAHSILDAR,MAVELIKKARA,PIN-690101. 4. DISTRICT SURVEY SUPERINTENDENT, ALAPPUZHA-688001. 5. RAMACHANDRAN PILLAI,S/O.SANKARA KURUP, MARUTHAVANA VEETTIL,KATTANAM VILLAGE,PALLICKAL.P.O MAVELIKKARA-690503. THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: O.P(CF) NO.4150 OF 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD.10.05.1999. EXT.P2: A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT PASSED BY THE MUNSIFF'S OURT,KAYAMKULAM,DTD.14.11.2008. EXT.P3: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, KAYAMKULAM DTD.04.12.2010. EXT.P4: A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD 24.02.2011. EXT.P5: A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD.13.05.2011. EXT.P6: A TRUE COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITIONER DTD.31.03.2011. EXT.P7: A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DTD.13.06.2011. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== O.P(C) No.4150 of 2011 ==================================== Dated this the 16th day of December, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S. No.75 of 2005 of the court of learned Munsiff, Kayamkulam. That is a suit for prohibitory and mandatory injunction. The suit was decreed in part granting mandatory injunction against respondents 1 to 4 to take follow up action pursuant to Ext.P6, proceeding and effect mutation of property of petitioner as directed in Ext.P6. Prohibitory injunction sought against the 5th respondent was disallowed. Execution petition filed by the 5th respondent was closed as not pressed on 04.12.2010. Later 5th respondent filed E.P. No.23 of 2011 for enforcement of the decree for mandatory injunction. According to the petitioner, 5th respondent has no right to enforce the decree. The prayer in this petition is for a direction to the learned Munsiff to dispose of E.P. No.23 of 2011. 2. It is to be noticed that E.P. No.23 of 2011 was filed in the year 2011. In the circumstances no direction for early disposal of the execution petition is necessary. It is open to the petitioner to request learned Munsiff for early disposal of the execution petition. Original Petition is closed with above observation. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv