IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 25TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 3RD ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 26012 of 2009(O) -------------------------- OS.79/2006 of SUB COURT, MAVELIKKARA .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- M/S.SUNDARAM BNP PARIBAS HOME FINANCE LTD, (FORMERLY KNWON AS SUNDARAM HOME FINANCE LTED II FLOOR, ELIZABATH ALEXANDER MEMORIAL BUILDINGS, D.NO.XI/3597, SHANMUGHAM ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI- 682 031, REP.BY P.N.ANOOP, AUTHORISED OFFICER & SENIOR OFFICER(LEGAL) BY ADV. SRI.S.EASWARAN SRI.P.MURALEEDHARAN (IRIMPANAM) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. GOPINATHAN, S/O.PADMANABHAN, UJJAINI, KUNTHAPPALLIL DESOM, VATHAYIKARA VILLAGE, PERUNTHALMANNA TALUK. 2. RAMACHANDRAN, S/O.KOCHU KRISHNAN, OOTTUYPARAMBU, KARUVATTA VADAKKUM MURI, KARUVATTA VILLAGE, NOW RESIDING AT ROOM.NO.11, THRIPADY BHAVAN, OPP.BPCL, MAIN GATE, MAHUL CHAMBER, MUMBAI-400074. 3. MRS.REMA RAMACHANDRAN, W/O. RAMACHANDRAN -DO- -DO- THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.26012 OF 2009 (O) ----------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of September, 2009 J U D G M E N T The writ petitioner has filed a claim petition in respect of a property over which an interim attachment prior to judgment was passed in O.S.No.79 of 2006 by the Sub Court, Mavelikkara. Petitioner, a finance company, claims mortgage right over the property which is under attachment, and, therefore, it has moved the claim petition for lifting that attachment. Despite such a petition filed one year back, it is the grievance of the petitioner that the petition has not been taken up for enquiry and disposal. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, I called for a report from the learned Sub Judge, Mavilakkara. Report sent by the learned Sub Judge would indicate that the enquiry on the claim petition is delayed for the reason of pendency of old cases before that court. The learned Sub Judge has also formed an opinion, before proceeding with the WPC.26012/09 2 enquiry, that evidence may be necessary for disposal of the claim petition. That question has to be considered after examining the merits of the petition with reference to the objections raised by the opposite parties. Considering the facts and circumstances involved, I direct the learned Sub Judge to dispose the claim petition as expeditiously as possible, after affording reasonable opportunity to both sides to lead evidence in support of their respective case, at any rate, before the closing of the courts in the Christmas vacation. Subject to the above direction, this writ petition is disposed. Handover a copy of this judgment to the court concerned forthwith. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE prp