IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2009 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 7342 of 2009(O) CMA.12, 13 AND 15/2008 OF SUB COURT, MUVATTUPUZHA PETITIONER: --------------- ALICE JOSE, W/O.JOSE, CHELAPPURATH HOUSE, OLIYAPURAM KARA, THIRUMARADY VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW JOHN (K) SRI.AJEESH K.SASI RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. PAUL GOERGE, S/O.GEORGE, VALIYAKUNNEL @ THONDELIL HOUSE, OLIYAPPURAM KARA, THIRUMARADY VILLAGE. 2. SUNNY GEORGE, S/O. DO. DO. 3. RAJU GEORGE, S/O. DO. DO. BY ADV. SMT.CHINCY GOPAKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) NO. 7342 OF 2009 O ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 17th March, 2009 JUDGMENT The Writ Petition is filed by the plaintiff in O.S.No.324 of 2008, on the file of the Principal Munsiff's Court, Muvattupuzha, praying that a direction may be issued to the Sub Court, Muvattupuzha to hear and dispose of C.M.A.Nos.12 of 2008, 13 of 2008 and 15 of 2008,expeditiously. 2. The petitioner filed I.A.No.2212 of 2008 for temporary injunction to restrain the respondents from interfering with the right of the petitioner to take water from the well in the plaint B schedule property. The petitioner also filed I.A.No.2213 of 2008 for an interim mandatory injunction to restore the water connection pending disposal of the suit. The trial court passed an order dated 4.9.2008, by which the application for interim mandatory injunction was dismissed and the application for temporary injunction was partly allowed. Challenging the order in the application for temporary injunction, both parties have filed appeals before the Sub Court, Muvattupuzha; C.M.A.No.13 of 2008 was filed by the petitioner W.P.(C) NO.7342 OF 2009 :: 2 :: herein and C.M.A.No.15 of 2008 was filed by the defendants. Challenging the order in I.A.No.2213 of 2008, the petitioner has filed C.M.A.No.12 of 2008 before the Sub Court, Muvattupuzha. All the three C.M.Appeals are pending disposal. 3. The only relief sought for by the petitioner is to issue a direction to the Sub Court, Muvattupuzha to dispose of the three C.M.Appeals pending before it. The respondents have entered appearance. A counter affidavit is filed on behalf of the respondents. The counter affidavit contains various averments in respect of the merits of the case and those averments were made in answer to the averments in the Writ Petition. I do not think that reference to any averment, either in the Writ Petition or in the counter affidavit, in respect of the merits of the case is required, since it would cause prejudice to either party. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of by directing the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Muvattupuzha to dispose of C.M.A.Nos.12 of 2008, 13 of 2008 and 15 of 2008 expeditiously. The court below shall make every W.P.(C) NO.7342 OF 2009 :: 3 :: endeavour to dispose of the Appeals, if possible, before closure of the Court for summer holidays. It is agreed by both parties that they would be ready to argue the case on any date to which it is posted. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/