IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN FRIDAY, THE 9TH APRIL 2010 / 19TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 12611 of 2010(O) ------------------------------------- OS.334/2006 of I ADDL.SUB COURT,ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. NAZEER, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O. HAMEED, RAZIA MANZIL, VATTEKATTU RAOD, KATHRIKADAVU, KALOOR, KOCHI. 2. NAVAS, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.HAMEED, RAZIA MANZIL, VATTEKATTU ROAD, KATHRIKADAVU, KALOOR, KOCHI. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.SAJEEV KUMAR SRI.LAJI SAM ZACHARIAH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- RAZIA, AGED 35 YEARS, W/O.MUHAMMED RAFFI RAFEEK MANZIL, NADUVATH NAGAR P.O., CHERTHALA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss P.BHAVADASAN, J. ------------------------------------- WP(C) No.12611 of 2010-O ------------------------------------- Dated 9th April 2010 Judgment The limited prayer in this Writ Petition is for a direction to the 6th Additional District Court to consider and dispose of Ext.P4 review petition filed by the petitioners as expeditiously as possible and till then to keep in abeyance, the execution of the decree in OS No.334/06. 2. The petitioners are defendants 1 and 2 in OS No.334/2006 on the file of the First Additional Sub Court, Ernakulam. The suit was one for partition. It was decreed. The petitioners say that they were unaware of the passing of the final decree in the suit and therefore, they filed an application for setting aside the same and also another application to condone the delay in filing the said application. Those petitions were dismissed by a common order dated 17.11.2009, a copy of which is produced as Ext.P3. The petitioners preferred an appeal as CMA WPC 12611/10 2 No.120/09 before the 6th Additional District Court, Ernakulam challenging Ext.P3 order. The respondent entered appearance and pointed out that the lower court has no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. The petitioners therefore, preferred a review petition seeking to review the impugned order. Ext.P4 is the copy of the said RP. The grievance of the petitioners is that without disposing of the RP filed by them, the execution proceedings are being proceeded with, which will cause irreparable loss and injury to them. Therefore, the petitioners pray for a direction to the Court below to dispose of the RP and till then, to keep the execution proceedings in abeyance. 3. There is no reason, why the Court below should not dispose of the RP filed by the petitioners. Considering the various aspects, it is felt that it is only just and proper to direct the 6th Additional District Court, Ernakulam to take up Ext.P4 RP and dispose of the same in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of re-opening of the WPC 12611/10 3 Court after the mid-summer vacation. Till then, the execution proceedings in OS No.334/06 shall be kept in abeyance. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE sta WPC 12611/10 4