IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 27TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 31411 of 2009(O) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SURENDRAN, AGED 40, S/O.KUNJAMBU, METHALA KUNNATH HOUSE, EDAKKAD AMSOM, CHALA, PANTHRANDUKANDI DESOM, KANNUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) ADV. PREETHY KARUNAKARAN ADV. SRI.RAVI.K(PARIYARATH) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. JOSE, S/O.LONAPPAN, CHIRIYANKANDATH HOUSE, PERUMBILLISSERY DESOM, CHOVOOR VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK. 2. ANNIE, W/O.LUVIS, THEKANATHUCHULLI HOUSE, KODAKARA P.O., KAVUMTHARA DESOM, KODAKARA VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 3. SHABIR, S/O.ABDULLA, KORATTIPARAMBIL HOUSE, KATTOOR DESOM, KATTOOR VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 4. SHABU, S/O.ABDUL MAJEED, PUTHIYA VEETTIL HOUSE, CHENTHRAPPINI DESOM, CHENTHRAPPINI VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 5. SHANAVAS, S/O.HYDROSE, PUTHIYAVEETTIL HOUSE, KUZHUPULLIKKARA DESOM, KUZHUPULLIKKARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR FOR R3 TO 5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.31411 OF 2009 -------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of November 2009 ---------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT Petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S No.327 of 2007 on the file of Sub Court, Irinjalakuda. Suit is for specific performance of an agreement of sale, and the respondents are the defendants. Agreement of sale on which the suit claim was based was disputed by the defendants in their written statement. Plaintiff moved an application for sending over the agreement of sale with the signatures and writings collected from the first defendant to a handwriting expert for scientific examination. Pending that application and without passing any order thereof, the suit has now been included in the list for trial is the grievance espoused in the writ petition for issue of a writ/order/direction to the learned Sub Judge to consider Ext.P3 application before proceeding with the trial of the suit. 2. Notice being given to the respondents they have entered appearance. I heard the counsel on both sides. From the submissions made, it appears that in view of the W.P.(C).No.31411 OF 2009 Page numbers orders passed in an interlocutory application for injunction from which a miscellaneous appeal was also taken by one among the parties, the attention of the court was not invited to Ext.P3 application for passing of appropriate orders at the appropriate time. After disposal of the C.M appeal, on receipt of the records, it is submitted, the court has straight away posted Ext.P3 application with the suit and that too including the case in the special list for trial. As it appears that there is no latches on the part of the plaintiff in prosecuting the Ext.P3 application but its non consideration arose under circumstances as indicated above, I find, consideration of Ext.P3 application and its disposal after hearing both sides is essential to safe guard the interest of justice. So much so, there will be a direction to the court below to consider and dispose of Ext.P3 application before proceeding with the trial of the suit. Writ petition is disposed as indicated above. Sd/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE vdv