IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN FRIDAY, THE 26TH MARCH 2010 / 5TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 10543 of 2010(O) ------------------------------------ AS.30/2010 of ADDL.DISTRICT COURT-I,MAVELIKKARA OS.49/2006 of MUNSIFF COURT, MAVELIKKARA ........................................... PETITIONER(S): -------------------- SHAILAJA BHAI, AGED 47, W/O. PADMAKARAN, PNDIVILAYIL, PUTHUPPLLY KUNNAM, NOORANADU VILLAGE, CHARUMOODU. BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP SRI.V.VIJULAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- MARY JAMES, W/O. JAMES AMPANATTU, AMBANATTU VLAYIL, CHUNAKKARA VILLAGE, CHARUMOODU POST. ALAPUZHA DISTRICT. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sou. P. BHAVADASAN, J --------------------------- W.P(C).No.10543 OF 2010 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T In this writ petition the petitioner seeks a direction from this court to the District Court, Mavelikkara to pass orders on I.A.164/10 within the time fixed by this court and until the disposal to keep the proceedings in E.P. in O.S.49/06 in abeyance. 2. Petitioner is the defendant in O.S.49/06 before the Munsiff Court, Mavelikkara. She is a tenant under the plaintiff. She is running a furniture shop and defaulted in paying rent. The land lord filed a suit and obtained a decree. It is submitted that decree was passed on 9.12.2009. The petitioner claims that she has taken the matter in appeal before the IInd Additional District Court, Mavelikkara. Memorandum of appeal is produced and marked as Ext.P2. The petitioner moved I.A.164/10 dated 27.2.2010 which is marked as Ext.P3. In the said appeal, the petitioner sought WPC.10543/10 2 for a stay of the further proceedings in E.P before the execution court. 3. It is pointed out by the petitioner that on 1.3.2010 the court below ordered notice in view of the caveat filed by the respondent. The appeal now stands posted on 29.03.2010. Notice to respondent was returned with endorsement that the house of the respondent remain closed. In the light of the endorsement, appeal comes again on 29.3.2010. No orders have been so far passed in I.A.164/10 and petitioner apprehends that order may not be passed on 29.3.2010. 4. The petitioner pointed out that in the meanwhile, execution proceedings have been taken up by the decree holder. Delivery is ordered on 6.4.2010. The petitioner pointed out that there may be a direction to the District Court to dispose of the appeal and the interlocutory application at the earliest so that the delivery of property WPC.10543/10 3 can be avoided. 5. The prayer to stay proceedings till the District court dispose of I.A.164/10 in A.S.30/2010 cannot be entertained by this court. I.A. For stay of execution is before the appellate court which is seized of the matter. Both the appeals as well as E.P. stand posted to 29.3.2010. There is no merit in plea that the court will not take up the applications for hearing on 29.3.2010. 6. There is no reason as to why court should adjourn hearing on I.A.164/10 unless there are compelling circumstances. However, there will be a direction to the lower court to see that as far as possible I.A.164/10 shall taken up, heard and disposed of on 29.3.2010 and if it not possible to do so, dispose of it within a week from 29.3.2010. P. BHAVADASAN, JUDGE. Sou.