IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 6TH APRIL 2009 / 16TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 11332 of 2009(J) ------------------------------------- PETITIONERS : --------------------- 1. BARATHAN, S/O.LATE APPUTTY, AGED 63 YEARS, PEEDIKA KANDI HOUSE, P.O.KOLATHARA, KOZHIKODE. 2. NARAYANI, W/O.LATE KUMARAN, PEEDIKA KANDI HOUSE, P.O.KOLATHARA, KOZHIKODE. 3. HARISH, S/O.LATE CHANDRASEKHARAN, ANANDHALAYAM, P.O.KALATHARA, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.R.SUDHISH SMT.M.MANJU RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KOZHIKODE. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, KOZHIKODE TALUK. 4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH, KOZHIKODE. 5. OLAVANNA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, OLAVANNA, KOZHIKODE. 6. RAVEENDRAN V.P., (RETIRED TEACHER), S/O.PERACHAN, AGED 56 YEARS, VELLAPALLI HOUSE, P.O.KOLATHARA, KOZHIKODE-673655. SRI. P.N. SANTHOSH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 11332 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 6th day of April , 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioners submit that aggrieved by Exhibit P11, an order of eviction from the property which has been in their possession since long, Exhibit P12 appeal has been filed before the first respondent, along with Exhibits P13 and P14 applications seeking stay and condonation of delay in filing the appeals. It is stated that application for stay and condonation of delay have not been considered so far and that in the meanwhile, auction of the property has been held by the 5th respondent. It is in these circumstances, this writ petition has been filed. 2. As can be seen from above, aggrieved by Exhibit P11, the petitioner has, though belatedly filed a statutory appeal and the appellate authority is seized of the whole matter. It was at that stage, auction has been held on 26/03/2009. In my view, in these circumstances, it is only appropriate for the appellate authority to consider that petition to condone delay, and depending on the order to be passed, the stay application shall be considered without any delay and before any further action is W.P.(C) No. 11332/2009 2 taken on the basis of auction that was already held. 3. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition directing that the first respondent shall consider Exhibit P14 application for condonation of delay and depending upon the orders to be passed on Exhibit P14, Exhibit P13, petition seeking stay of further proceedings pursuant to Exhibit P11 shall be considered and orders shall be passed. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within six weeks of production of copy of this judgment. 4. It is directed that in the meanwhile, all further proceedings pursuant to Exhibit P11 will be kept in abeyance. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the first and fifth respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE scm