IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 7TH APRIL 2009 / 17TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 9433 of 2009(O) ------------------------- OS.210/2007 of MUNSIFF COURT,NEDUMANGAD .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- SHAMNATH.A.RAHIM, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL RAHIM, DILSHAD MANZIL, KAZHAKKOOTTAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.A.RANJITH NARAYANAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SEENA, SREE SHAILAM, KUNDARA P.O. 2. SAINA, VARNAM HOUSE, KOPPAM, VITHURA, CHITTUVETTU MURI, THOLICODE P.O. 3. LAJI, VARNAM HOUSE, KOPPAM, VITHURA, CHITTUVETTU MURI, THOLICODE P.O. 4. SAJU, KOLLOOR BUILDINGS, THONNAKKAL P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 5. V.H.SANAL, VARNAM HOUSE, KOPPAM, VITHURA, CHITTUVETTU MURI, THOLICODE P.O. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.9433 of 2009 -------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of April, 2009 JUDGMENT The Writ Petition is filed by the first defendant in O.S.No.210 of 2007, on the file of the court of the Munsiff of Nedumangad, praying for a direction to the trial court to dispose of the suit expeditiously. The suit was filed by the respondents for injunction. 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Writ Petitioner that the suit property is a portion of the property involved in an earlier suit for redemption of mortgage and that the Writ Petitioner is an assignee from the decree holder therein. It is submitted that delivery was effected in the suit for redemption. According to the Writ Petitioner, the plaintiffs in O.S.No.210 of 2007 are the assignees from the judgment debtors and therefore, they are bound by the proceedings in execution in the earlier suit. It is also pointed out that in similar circumstances, in respect of portions of the larger extent, in O.S.Nos.227 of 2007 and 237 of 2007 were dismissed by the WPC No. 9433/2009 2 Munsiff’s Court, Nedumangad, and appeals are pending before the Sub Court, Nedumangad, against the judgment and decree in those cases. 3. The prayer is opposed by the respondents mainly on the ground that an application has been filed to send some of the registers produced by the Writ Petitioner for the opinion of an expert and that application is pending. According to the respondents, this Writ Petition is filed to see that those applications are not disposed of in accordance with law. The learned counsel for the Writ Petitioner submitted that there is no such intention on the part of the Writ Petitioner and that any order which the court may think fit and proper can be passed in the said application. The learned counsel also submitted that the only apprehension of the Writ Petitioner is that the respondents would indulge in all sorts of dilatory tactics and such tactics would delay the disposal of the suit. Taking into account the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for both parties, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Munsiff’s Court, Nedumangad, to give priority in WPC No. 9433/2009 3 the matter of the disposal of O.S.No.210 of 2007. This direction is being issued taking into account the fact that according to the Writ Petitioner this is the second round of litigation that he is facing. The direction to dispose of the suit expeditiously should not stand in the way of the trial court in considering the applications pending before it in accordance with law. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl