IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 19TH AUGUST 2010 / 28TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 26449 of 2010(O) -------------------------- OS.1324/2009 of PRL.MUNSIFF COURT.,ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER: --------------- V.J.KRISHNAN, S/O.JOGYA SHETTY, AGED 56 YEARS, ALUKKAL VEEDU, KOCHI-12. BY ADV. DR.PAULY MATHEW MURICKEN RESPONDENT: --------------- ERATTAKULANGARA BHAGAVATHY DEVASWOM, REP. BY THE RECIEVER, ADV. K.K.SATHEESH, HIGH COURT ROAD, ERNAKULAM-31 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.C.No.26449 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this 19th day of August, 2010 JUDGMENT Plaintiff No.1 in O.S.No.1324 of 2009 of the court of learned Munsiff, Ernakulam is the petitioner. The suit concerned administration of a temple and as per Ext.P1, order dated 28-01-2010 an Advocate Commissioner was appointed to conduct election to the executing committee of the temple. The Commissioner conducted election and submitted report. Petitioner filed I.A.No.2877 of 2010 to set aside the election while defendant Nos.8 and 9 filed I.A.No.2344 of 2010 for the same purpose. In the meantime, a receiver was appointed as per order dated 07-04-2010 and he has taken charge of administration of the temple on 12-04-2010. Learned Munsiff dismissed I.A.Nos.2344 and 2877 of 2010 as per common order dated 13-08-2010. Prayer in this writ petition is to keep in abeyance operation of order dated 13-08-2010. Apprehension of petitioner is that if the said order is not kept in abeyance, receiver may be discharged. It is seen that petitioner has filed Ext.P6, application (I.A.No.5278 of 2010) in the court below requesting to keep common order dated 13-08-2010 in abeyance W.P.C.No.26449 of 2010 : 2 : for a period of one month. That application is pending consideration of learned Munsiff. Petitioner can request learned Munsiff to pass appropriate order on Ext.P6, application. If petitioner apprehends that receiver is likely to be discharged it is open to the petitioner to make appropriate application before learned Munsiff in that regard if the petitioner is otherwise entitled to do so. There is no reason why in the above circumstances this court should interfere with the writ petition. Learned Munsiff is directed to dispose of Ext.P6, application as early as possible. Resultantly without prejudice to the right of petitioner as above stated this writ petition is closed. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-