IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 5TH JUNE 2009 / 15TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 15380 of 2009(O) --------------------------------------- (O.S. NO. 126/03 OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, ATTINGAL) ............ PETITIONER: ------------------- BINU SUNIL, W/O.DR.SUNIL MELETHARA VEEDU, ALINERA WARD, AYIROOPARA VILLAGE, KATTAYIKONAM P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. MR.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR. RESPONDENT: ---------------------- A.NAZARUDEEN, S/O.ABDUL RAHMAN, KAVUMOOLA VEEDU, CHITTATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/06/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.15380 of 2009 - O --------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of June, 2009 J U D G M E N T This writ petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “To issue appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Munsiff's Court, Attingal to consider and dispose of Exts.P2 and P3 in O.S.No.129/2003 as expeditiously as possible, at any rate prior to disposal of execution petition”. 2. Petitioner is the judgment debtor in E.P.No.44/2008 in O.S.No.126/2003 before the Munsiff Court, Attingal. Suit was one for recovery of possession of plaint schedule building with arrears of rent and for perpetual injunction. Suit was decreed ex- parte. Petitioner has moved an application for setting aside the ex-parte decree with a petition to condone the delay and meanwhile, the decree holder is taking hasty steps for executing the decree, is the grievance canvassed in the writ petition for issuing a direction to the Execution Court not to proceed with the execution proceedings till the disposal of the application moved for setting aside the ex-parte decree. W.P.(C).No.15380 of 2009 - O 2 3. I heard the counsel for the petitioner. 4. From the submissions made and also the facts and circumstances presented, I find previously a writ petition was moved by the respondent/decree holder before this Court in which a judgment had been rendered directing the execution court to take expeditious steps for executing the decree. The above writ petition, numbered as 9414/2009, judgment was delivered on 27.5.2009. The judgment in that writ petition was rendered after hearing the present petitioner/judgment debtor in the execution petition. A copy of the judgment has been made available to me, and going through the judgment, I find the very same grievance now canvassed by the petitioner was presented at the time of hearing of that petition and this Court has observed that “the application for setting aside the ex-parte decree by the petitioner will have to be disposed of in the usual course”. Perusing the judgment it is also seen that there was an ex-parte decree earlier also in the suit and exercising its discretion trial court set aside that decree and permitted the judgment debtor to contest the suit. Subsequently, default again W.P.(C).No.15380 of 2009 - O 3 committed led to the present ex-parte decree against the petitioner. I do not want to express any opinion on the merits of the application moved by the petitioner for setting aside the ex- parte decree. Having regard to the directions issued by this Court in W.P. (C).No.9419/2009, I find it will be highly improper for me to pass any contradictory direction in the present writ petition and, accordingly, it is dismissed. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. bkn/-