IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 7TH JULY 2009 / 16TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 17284 of 2009(O) -------------------------- OS.411/2001 of MUNSIFF COURT,HARIPAD .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- AJITHA @ VALSALA, AGED 38 YEARS, W/O.THANKAPPAN, CHETTYSSERIL VEEDU, KOTTAKKAKOM MURI, PALLIPPAD VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.S.MOHANAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SUDHAKARAN, AGED 57 YEARS, S/O.RAGHAVAN, KADAMPATTU KIZHAKKETHIL, VALIYAKUZHI MURI, CHEPPAD VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. THANKAPPAN, CHETTYSSERIL VEEDU, KOTTAKKAKOM MURI, PALLIPPAD VILLAGE, HARIPPAD. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: jma S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------- W.P.(C) No.17284 OF 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of July 2009 ------------------------------------- JUDGMENT Petitioner is the second appellant in A.S No.109/2004 on the file of the Additional District Court, Mavelikkara which is preferred against the decree and judgment passed in O.S No.411/2001 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Haripad. First respondent herein was the plaintiff in the suit and the second respondent, the husband of the petitioner, the first defendant in the suit. Suit was one for money and it was decreed in terms of the plaint. In the present petition the petitioner seeks for stay of the execution proceedings of the decree passed in O.S No.411/2001 being continued before the Munsiff Court, Haripad, and also orders to the Additional District Court, Mavelikkara for W.P.(C) No.17284 OF 2009 2 expeditious disposal of A.S No.109/2004 pending on its file. 2. Having regard to the facts and circumstances presented I find notice to the respondents is not necessary, and it is dispensed with. From the submissions made and also the statements made in the petition it is seen that the decree has already been executed by sale of the property belonging to the judgment debtors and what remains is only the delivery of the property. So the question of staying the execution of proceedings at this stage does not arise for consideration. As regards an expeditious disposal of the appeal is sought for, to consider whether it is possible at this stage, a report from the learned Additional District Judge was called for to ascertain whether steps are completed and the appeal is ready for hearing. The learned Additional District Judge has submitted a report informing that the appeal is ready for hearing. W.P.(C) No.17284 OF 2009 3 But the report shows that the court is overburdened with appeals filed much earlier and at present appeals filed in 1999 - 2001 are being taken up for hearing. Having regard to the fact that the appeal 109 of 2004 arise from a money decree, I find priority has to be given for hearing of that appeal, and it is unlikely that the appeal would steal considerable precious time of the court. So much so, I direct the learned Additional District Judge to hear and dispose A.S 109/2004, after affording opportunity to the counsel on both sides to address arguments with regard to their respective case, and to dispose it expeditiously, at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE VDV