IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 4TH JUNE 2010 / 14TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 17335 of 2010(O) -------------------------- OS.382/2009 of PRL.SUB COURT,THRISSUR .................... PETITIONERS: DEFENDANTS 7&8 ----------------------------- 1. JAYASENAN, AGED 61 YEARS, S/O.PISHARATH KITTA, P.O.PUTHAMBALLI, IRINGAPRAM DESOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. ABOOBACKER, AGED 53 YEARS, S/O.PANICHAMKULANGARA MAMMED, EDAKAZHIYOOR AMSOM DESOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT SRI.RANJIT BABU RESPONDENTS: PLAINTIFF & DEFENDANTS 1-6: ------------------------------------------ 1. PRASANTH, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.NEDIYEDATHU DEVAN, MANATHALA AMSOM DESOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. SADANANDAN, AGED 60 YEARS, S/O.VAKKAYIL MAAKUTTY, EDAKAZHIYOOR P.O., EDAKAZHIYOOR AMSOM DESOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. SULAIMAN HAJI, AGED 56 YEARS, S/O.KUNJAVUNNI, AMBALATHU HOUSE, EDAKAZHIYOOR AMSOM DESOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 4. RAVEENDRAN, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O.KONGANDATHU KUNJAPPU, EDAKAZHIYOOR AMSOM DESOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 5. DILEEP KUMAR, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.PALAPETTI KARUNAKARAN NAYAR, EDAKAZHIYOOR AMSOM DESOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. WP(C).No. 17335 of 2010(O) 6. KAREEM, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.KALLIVALAPPIL KUNJAYAMU, EDAKAZHIYOOR AMSOM DESOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 7. DIVAKARAN, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.CHELLIKKATTIL KUNJIRAMAN, CHAVAKKAD P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.C.No.17335 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this 04th day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT Defendant Nos.7 and 8 in O.S.No.382 of 2009 of the court of learned Sub Judge, Thrissur seek direction for early disposal of Exts.P3 and P5, applications preferred by respondent No.1/plaintiff. O.S.No.382 of 2009 is a suit for specific performance of an agreement for sale allegedly executed between respondent No.1 and respondent Nos.2 to 7. Petitioners claim to be subsequent assignees from respondent Nos.2 to 7. Respondent Nos.2 to 7 remained ex parte in the suit. The suit is contested by petitioners. In the course of the suit as per order on Ext.P5, application petitioners and respondent Nos.2 to 7 were injuncted from alienating the suit property. As per Ext.P3, application property has also been attached. Petitioners have preferred objection to Exts.P3 and P5, applications but the grievance is that learned Sub Judge has not disposed of Exts.P3 and P5. Learned counsel submits that petitioners had even agreed to execute sale deed in favour of respondent No.1/plaintiff provided he deposited balance amount payable under the agreement for sale for payment to the petitioners. W.P.C.17335 of 2010 : 2 : 2. The suit is of the year 2009. Without understanding the volume of work of the court concerned and also the old cases to be disposed of I do not think it proper or necessary to issue direction to the court for early disposal of Exts.P3 and P5. But considering the circumstances stated by learned counsel and also taking into account the offer made by petitioners to execute the sale deed provided respondent No.1 deposited the balance amount payable under the agreement for sale for payment to petitioners I make it clear that it will be open to the petitioners to request learned Sub Judge for early disposal of Exts.P3 and P5, applications (I.A.Nos.1865 of 2009 and 1866 of 2009) in O.S.No.382 of 2009 pending before learned Sub Judge. If any such request is made learned Sub Judge shall consider the request and pass appropriate orders. With the above observation the writ petition is disposed of. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-