IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 13TH JULY 2010 / 22ND ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 21566 of 2010(O) -------------------------- AS.6/2007 of SUB COURT,KOTTARAKKARA OS.406/2004 of MUNSIFF COURT, KOTTARAKKARA .................... PETITIONER: --------------- SASIKUMAR, S/O.RAGHAVAN PILLAI, 'SREEPADAM', CHERUVALLUR, PARAMCODE MURI, ELAMADU VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKADA TALUK,. BY ADV. SRI.S.MOHANAN SRI.K.V.ANIL KUMAR RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFF: --------------- 1. CHANDRASEKHARAN PILLAI @ BALACHANDRAN PILLAI,S/O.NEELAKANTAN PILLAI, BINDU NIVAS, CHERUVALLUR, UMMANNOOR MURI, UMMANNOOR VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK-691 547. 2. BINDU, D/O.THANKAMANIYAMMA, S/O.NEELAKANTAN PILLAI, BINDU NIVAS, CHERUVALLUR, UMMANNOOR MURI, UMMANNOOR VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK-691 547. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.C.No.21566 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this 13th day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT Petitioner is appellant No.1 in A.S.No.6 of 2007 of the court of learned Sub Judge, Kottarakkara which arose from judgment and decree in O.S.No.353 of 2004 of the court of learned Munsiff, Kottarakkara filed by petitioner No.1 and others for a declaration of title and possession of the suit property and for consequential reliefs. In the meantime respondent No.1 filed O.S.No.406 of 2004 in the court of learned Munsiff, Kottarakkara for a declaration of title and possession of the suit property, according to the petitioner in respect of the same property. It is the case of petitioner that dispute regarding title is involved in both the cases. O.S.No.353 of 2004 was dismissed which is under challenge in A.S.No.6 of 2007. Petitioner and others made an attempt to get O.S.No.406 of 2004 stayed until disposal of A.S.No.6 of 2007. But that application was dismissed by the learned Munsiff which, though challenged in this court in W.P.C.No.6686 of 2009 did not succeed. Apprehension of petitioner is that regarding the same issue, divergent findings might be entered. W.P.C.No.21566 of 2010 : 2 : 2. Though in this writ petition an order for stay of trial of O.S.No.406 of 2004 is also sought for learned counsel, in view of dismissal of application for stay in O.S.No.406 of 2004 and its confirmation by this court in W.P.C.No.6686 of 2009 has confined his prayer to a direction to the learned Sub Judge to dispose of A.S.No.6 of 2007 as expeditiously as possible. O.S.No.406 of 2004 though was brought up for trial in the list was removed from the list on account of respondent No.1 seeking impleadment of his daughter as additional plaintiff No.2 and that application being allowed. 3. I find from the judgment of this court in W.P.C.No.6686 of 2009 that this court also noticed that there are some similarities and identities in the issues to be considered in the suits. In view of that, it is necessary that learned Sub Judge disposed of A.S.No.6 of 2007 at the earliest. Resultantly this writ petition is disposed of directing learned Sub Judge, Kottarakkara to dispose of A.S.No.6 of 2007 as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment if preliminary steps are over. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-