IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 22ND SEPTEMBER 2009 / 31ST BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 26547 of 2009(O) -------------------------- OS.2120/2008 of PRL.M.C.,TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- PAVURETH TRUST, P.O.BOX NO.1076, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP. BY ITS SOLE TRUSTEE, SHRI.GEORGE CHRISTOPHER. BY ADV. SRI.DALE P.KURIEN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- A.SITARAMAN, RAM NIVAS, K.PADMANABHAN ROAD, AYYAPPAN KAVU, ERNAKULAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------- W.P.(C).No.26547 OF 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of September 2009 ------------------------------------- JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs. i) Call for the records of the case in O.S No.2120/2008 pending before the Principal Munsiff's Court, Thiruvananthapuram by way of issuing a writ of certiorari or other appropriate orders or directions of similar nature. ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or a direction of similar nature to the Principal Munsiff's Court, Thiruvananthapuram to try and dispose of O.S No.2120/2008 on merits at the earliest at any rate within a period of two months hence forth. iii) To issue such other writ order direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem to be fit, just and necessary in the circumstances of this case and in the interest of justice. W.P.(C).No.26547 OF 2009 Page numbers 2. petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S No.2120 of 2008 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Thiruvananthapuram. Suit is one for a decree of mandatory injunction, and the respondent is the defendant. The decree of mandatory injunction sought for is one for directing the respondent to vacate from the plaint property which admittedly is situate at Ernakulam. Plaintiff, a trust claims that the defendant was permitted to occupy the building on the basis of a license agreement and once the license is revoked, he is liable to vacate the premises. In the writ petition, the petitioner / plaintiff seeks only directions / orders to the court below to dispose the suit expeditiously for which the petitioner had moved an application but it was not taken up and considered. Ext.P12 is the copy of that application. 3. Having regard to the submissions made by the counsel and taking note of the facts and circumstances presented, I find no notice to the respondent is necessary, and it is dispensed with. W.P.(C).No.26547 OF 2009 Page numbers The learned counsel for the petitioner canvassed for issuing appropriate directions / orders to the court below for expeditious disposal of the suit. The nonconsideration of Ext.P12 application moved for that purpose is also pointed out that unless a direction is given by the court, the trial of the suit will be delayed and that would cause injury to the petitioner / plaintiff. To consider the merit of the request, I have perused the exhibits produced with the writ petition including the copy of the plaint in O.S No. 2120/2008 on the file of the Principal Munsiff Court, Thiruvananthapuram. Suit is seen filed seeking a decree of mandatory injunction directing the defendant to vacate from the plaint property admittedly situate at Ernakulam. Before any direction for expeditious disposal of the suit can be given, it appears, the question of jurisdiction by the court before which it was instituted has to be considered in the given facts of the case. So much so, at this stage the reliefs claimed by the petitioner in the writ petition cannot be granted exercising the W.P.(C).No.26547 OF 2009 Page numbers extraordinary jurisdiction vested with this court. The question of territorial jurisdiction as to whether the suit filed before the Munsiff Court, Thiruvananthapuram in respect of an immovable property situate at Ernakulam is entertainable or not in view of the mandate covered by Section 16(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure demands attention by the court as a preliminary issue before proceeding further with the trial of the suit. I direct the court below to consider that issue and then proceed with the suit. The court below shall consider and decide the aforementioned issue within a span of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and pass appropriate orders over that issue. Subject to the above direction, the writ petition is closed. Send a copy of the judgment to the court below forthwith. Sd/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE vdv