IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 18TH MAY 2010 / 28TH VAISAKHA 1932 WP(C).No. 15049 of 2010(Q) ---------------------------------------- M.C.63/2010 OF SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THRISSUR. ..................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ HEINZ J.PAUL @ PREM MANASWI, AGED 62 YEARS, S/O.PAUL, "NALUKETTU", ALAKATTU MANA, POOTHARACKAL, CHEVVOOR VILLAGE, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.SANTHOSH (PODUVAL), SMT.R.RAJITHA. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. SURYA DEVAN, S/O.PANICKASSERY KUNJITTY, PERUMBILLISSERY DESOM, CHEVVOOR VILLAGE, THRISSUR. 2. SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, THRISSUR. R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.C.M. KAMMAPPU. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/05/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. V.RAMKUMAR, J. ------------------------------------- W.P(C)No. 15049 of 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of May, 2010 JUDGMENT The writ petitioner is the complainant in Exhibit P1 complaint filed by him before the Revenue Divisional Officer and Sub Divisional Magistrate, Thrissur. His main grievance in Ext.P1 complaint is with regard to the existence of certain trees allegedly posing a danger to his property. Ext.P1 complaint was filed on 1.1.2008. It took two years for the Sub Divisional Magistrate to pass Ext.P4 conditional order under Section 133 (1) of Cr.P.C, calling upon the first respondent herein to cut and remove the trees causing nuisance to the petitioner or in the alternative to appear and show cause why the conditional order should not be made absolute. The petitioner therefore seeks to expedite the proceedings in M.C.No.63/2010. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that even though the first respondent herein was W.P(C)No. 15049 of 2010 : 2 : directed to appear on 26.3.2010 and show cause why the conditional order should not be made absolute, he appeared and took time and the case now stands posted to 25.6.2010. If the trees in question really pose a threat as alleged by the petitioner, the second respondent, the Special Additional Magistrate cannot act leisurely. This writ petition is accordingly disposed as directing the second respondent to expedite the proceedings pending before him as M.C No.53/10 and pass final orders in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of being heard to both sides by either making the conditional order absolute or by dropping the proceedings in case he is satisfied that the trees do not cause any danger as alleged. Copy of this judgment shall be communicated to the second respondent for information and compliance. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE dmb W.P(C)No. 15049 of 2010 : 3 : W.P(C)No. 15049 of 2010 : 4 :