IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 16TH OCTOBER 2008 / 24TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 30387 of 2008(P) -------------------------- OS.1051/2001 of PRL.SUB COURT,THRISSUR .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- V.P.DAVIS, S/O PAULOSE, VADAKKETHALA VEEDU, KARAMUKKU VILLAGE, KANDASSANKADAVU P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMACHANDRAN SRI.S.SREEDEV RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------------ 1. FEDERAL BANK LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR MANAGER VADANAPPILLY P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. A.A. MUHAMMED HANEEFA, S/O ABOOBAKKAR, ARAKKAVEETIL HOUSE, FAROOQ NAGAR, VADANAPPILLY THRISSUR. 3. M.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, S/O AYYAPPAKUTTY, MAMNGATH HOUSE, THALIKULAM, THRISSUR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(c).No.30387 of 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 16 th day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is the claimant in a claim petition filed as E.A.No.1084 of 2005 in E.P.No.434 of 2003 in O.S.No.1051 of 2001 on the file of the Sub Court, Thrissur. In the said suit the 1st respondent herein brought the property attached in execution of the decree passed against respondents 2 and 3 herein. According to the petitioner, he had a prior attachment of the same property in his favour and he filed the said E.A.No.1084 of 2005 for lifting the attachment obtained by the 1st respondent. E.A.No.1084 of 2005 was dismissed stating that no evidence was adduced by the petitioner herein in support of the petition. The grievance of the petitioner is that he was denied an opportunity to adduce evidence in support of the the E.A. Aggrieved by the dismissal of the said E.A., the petitioner filed W.P.(c).No.26278 of 2005 before this Court. As per Ext.P1 judgment dated 5.9.05 this Court refused the interference holding that the remedy of the petitioner was to seek a review of the order. The petitioner W.P.(c).No.30387of 2008 2 thereupon filed E.A.No.1711 of 2005 (Ext.P2) seeking review of the order dismissing E.A.No.1084 of 2005. The petitioner also claims to have filed Ext.P3 petition E.A.No.1710 of 2005 for a stay of all further proceedings in execution of decree in O.S.No.1051 of 2001. The present grievance of the petitioner is that keeping Exts.P2 and P3 petitions pending, the Executing Court on 25.09.08 has confirmed the sale. He, therefore, seeks a direction to dispose of Ext.P2 review petition expeditiously. 2. In the light of the observations in Ext.P1 judgment it is only fair and proper that the Executing Court disposes of Ext.P2 review petition. This writ petition is disposed of directing the Sub Court, Thrissur to dispose of Ext.P2 review petition (E.A.No.1711/2005) in E.A.No.1084 of 2005 in E.P.No.434 of 2003 in O.S.No.1051 of 2001, expeditiously, after hearing both sides and at any rate within two months of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Until the disposal of Ext.P2 review petition, issuance of sale sannad and consequential proceedings shall stand stayed. Dated this the 16 th day of October, 2008. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE sj