IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH JULY 2010 / 16TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 21070 of 2010(O) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED / / IN EP 105/09 IN OS.1360/2007 of PRL.M.C.,ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- PRIYA DINESH,AGED 37 YEARS, W/O.DINESH BABU,44/1478 A,'PRAYAG',LFC ROAD, ORIENTAL ESTATE LANE,KALOOR,KOCHI-17. BY ADV. SRI.VIVEK VARGHESE P.J. SRI.VARUGHESE M EASO SRI.P.J.VINOD JOSEPH SRI.P.G.GOPALAKRISHNAN UNNITHAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- K.E.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR,AGED 71 YEARS, S/O.LATE.SREEDHARAN NAMBOODIRI,44/1478 A, 'PRAYAG',LFC ROAD,ORIENTAL ESTATE LANE, KALOOR,KOCHI-17. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.21070 of 2010 ------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T Defendant in O.S.No.1360/2007 of the court of learned Principal Munsiff, Ernakulam, and appellant in A.S.No.9 of 2009 of the court of learned Additional District Judge (VI), Ernakulam is the petitioner. She suffered a decree for eviction from the suit property as per Exts.P1 and P2. That decree is being put to execution in E.P.No.105/2009. In the mean time, petitioner challenged Exts.P1 and P2 before the appellate court where she made an undertaking to vacate the suit property in May, 2010 and acting upon that undertaking, learned Additional District Judge granted time to the petitioner till May, 2010. Execution of decree was accordingly stayed till then. Petitioner however, was not able to find an alternative accommodation and hence could not stand by her commitment. Respondent-decree holder has filed E.A.No.267/2010 for revival of proceedings and to evict petitioner without notice. Now, there is an order for delivery by 9.7.2010 with police assistance. Petitioner seeks W.P.(C) No.21070/2010 2 further time to vacate the suit property. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that on account of other compulsions petitioner was not able to find an alternative accommodation and seeks three months' time to vacate the suit property. 2. The matter is now pending before learned Additional District Judge and on the request of the petitioner, learned Additional District Judge has granted time to the petitioner till May, 2010. In such a situation proper course open to the petitioner is to approach the learned Additional District Judge with a request for further time stating reasons and seek relief. There is no reason why this Court should interfere in the matter and extend the time as applied for. Resultantly this petition is closed but without prejudice to the right of petitioner to seek extension of time to vacate the suit property, by filing appropriate application in the W.P.(C) No.21070/2010 3 court of learned Additional District Judge where the appeal against Exts.P1 and P2 is pending consideration. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. nj.