IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 27TH OCTOBER 2009 / 5TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 29951 of 2009(O) -------------------------- AS.139/2008 of PRL.SUB COURT, KOZHIKODE OS.27/2005 of PRL.MUNSIFF COURT, KOZHIKODE-II .................... PETITIONER: --------------- PADIPARAMBATH MEETHAL RAGHAVAN, S/O. PARANGODAN, R.K.HOUSE, AGED 55 YEARS, PANTHEERANKAVU AMSOM, KODAL DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. BY ADV. MR.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT: --------------- NALLITHODI APPU, S/O. UNNEERI, THAVALAPARAMBIL, PERUMANA AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.29951 of 2009 - O --------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T Writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: “i) To call for the entire records leading to the order dated 14.9.2009 in I.A.No.2275/2009 in A.S.No.139/2008 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Kozhikode and set aside the same. ii) To issue a writ or order or direction allowing I.A.No.2275/2009 in A.S.No.139/2008 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Kozhikode and allow the petitioner to deposit the decree amount as per order dated 22.6.2009.” 2. Petitioner is the appellant in A.S.No.139 of 2008 on the file of the Sub Court, Kozhikode. The appeal is preferred against the decree and judgment passed in O.S.No.27 of 2005 in which the petitioner was the defendant. A decree was granted in favour of the respondent/plaintiff directing the petitioner/defendant to vacate from the plaint premises and also to pay an amount of Rs.13,916/- towards licence fee with 6% interest per annum. He was also directed to pay damages at the rate of Rs.1,200/- per month for use and occupation of the W.P.(C).No.29951 of 2009 - O 2 schedule properties till surrender/possession of the plaintiff. Application moved for staying the operation of the decree was granted by the learned appellate judge without any condition, but, later, it was modified directing him to deposit the decree amount within two weeks. Petitioner/plaintiff applied for extension of time of one month for depositing the sum. That application was dismissed with the result the stay order has ceased to be in force. Petitioner has filed this writ petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order of the court below annulling the stay order for nondeposit of the amount ordered within the stipulated time. 3. I heard the counsel for the petitioner. Having regard to the facts and circumstances presented, I find no notice to the respondent is necessary and it is dispensed with. 4. The petitioner could not pay the amount within the stipulated time before the court below in view of financial difficulty and if given a chance he is ready to deposit the amount within the time stipulated by this Court, is the submission of the W.P.(C).No.29951 of 2009 - O 3 learned counsel. If the decree is executed during the pendency of the petition, according to the counsel, the appeal would become infructuous and severe hardship and irreparable injury would be caused to the petitioner. Taking note of the submissions made, it is ordered that if the petitioner tenders the amount ordered by the court below in Ext.P2 stay petition within two weeks from the date of this judgment, it shall be treated as valid tendering of the amount, with the result of reviving of the stay order and its continuance till disposal of appeal. In case of default in deposit of the amount within the time stipulated, the order of the court below on Ext.P2 application shall remain undisturbed. Subject to the above direction, writ petition is closed. Hand over a copy of this judgment to the counsel for the petitioner on usual terms and send a copy to the court concerned forthwith. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. bkn/-