IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 7TH MARCH 2011 / 16TH PHALGUNA 1932 OP(C).No. 171 of 2011() ----------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN EP 63/2010 IN OS.241/2005 OF MUNSIFF COURT,ADOOR .................... PETITIONERS: ---------------------- 1. PODIYAN.S, AGED 59 YEARS, S/O.AYYAN, THANEESH BHAVAN, KALANJOOR MURI, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. THANKAM, AGED 57 YEARS, W/O.PODIYAN, THANEESH BHAVAN, KALANJOOR MURI, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SASI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. ACHANKUNJU, AGED 45 YRS., MUTTATHU VEEDU, KONNELAYYAM, KALANJOOR MURI P.O., ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN 689694. 2. SASI, AGED 43 YEARS, EATTIVILA HOUSE, KONNELAYYAM, KALANJOOR MURI P.O., ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN 689694. 3. ANANDAN, AGED 43 YRS, EATTIVILA, KONNELAYYAM, ADOOR TALUK, KALANJOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA- 689694. 4. KAMALAN, AGED 60 YRS, S/O.KARTHIKEYAN, KONNELAYYATHU VEEDU, KALANJOOR P.O., ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA 689 694. ADV. SRI.K.N.GOVINDANKUTTY MENON FOR R1-4 SRI.V.B.PREMACHANDRAN FOR R1-4 THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------- O.P.(C).No.171 of 2011 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 7th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioners are the decree holder in O.S.No.241 of 2005 on the file of the court of the Munsiff of Adoor. A decree was passed on 18.11.2008 restraining defendants 1, 3, 4 and 5 by a permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing into the plaint schedule property and also from destroying the boundary wall or annexing any portion of the plaint schedule property and also from committing any act of waste therein. The petitioners filed E.P.No.63 of 2010 alleging that the decree was violated by the respondents therein. The prayers made in the Execution Petition are : (i) to detain the respondents in civil prison for having violated the decree. (ii) to restore the plaint schedule property to its original position. O.P.(C) No.171/2011 2 2. The Execution Petition was filed on 16.8.2010. Along with the Execution Petition, the petitioners filed applications for appointing a Commissioner and also for an interim order to render necessary police aid to restore the property to its original position. The grievance of the petitioners is that the executing court has not disposed of the Execution Petition and also has not passed any order in the applications referred to above. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that the Execution Petition is posted to 6.4.2011. In the facts and circumstances, I think a direction can be issued to the executing court to expedite the matter and to consider the applications filed by the petitioners mentioned above. Accordingly, the Original Petition is disposed of directing the executing court to expedite the execution proceedings and also to consider the applications submitted by the petitioners to appoint a Commissioner and to render necessary police aid. O.P.(C) No.171/2011 3 The executing court shall afford an opportunity of being heard to both parties and pass appropriate orders without much delay. It is made clear that I have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the contentions put forward by the parties. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl