IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2009 / 3RD CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 5365 of 2009(O) OS.315/1986 OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, PAYYANNUR AA.79/2008 of APPELLATE AUTHORITY (LR), KANNUR PETITIONER: --------------- KARATH VEETTIL KARTHIAYANI, W/O.LATE KIZHAKKILATTU VEETTIL MADHAVA MARAR, AGED 88 YEARS, RESIDING AT PERALAM AMSOM, PUTHUR DESOM. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.AMARESAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. APPELLATE AUTHORITY (LAND REFORMS), KANNUR. 2. EXECUTIVE OFFICER, PUTHUR SIVASHETHRAM BELONGING TO CHIRAKKAL KOVILAKAM, CHIRAKKAL AMSOM DESOM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) NO. 5365 OF 2009 O ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 24th March, 2009 JUDGMENT Though urgent notice was issued to the respondents, there is no appearance. 2. The writ petitioner filed A.A.No.79 of 2008 before the Appellate Authority (Land Reforms), Kannur, challenging the order in O.A.No.12172 of 1976. The Appeal is pending. The relief prayed for by the petitioner is to issue a direction to the Appellate Authority to consider and dispose of A.A.No.79 of 2008 without delay. 3. O.A.No.12172 of 1976 was dismissed on 16.6.1977. Later, S.M.No.681 of 1978 was initiated in respect of the same property. The SM Case was allowed and purchase certificate was issued in favour of the petitioner. The second respondent filed O.S.No.315 of 1986 before the Civil Court for recovery of possession. That suit was decreed by the trial court, which was confirmed in Appeal and Second Appeal. The petitioner stated that only after the disposal of the Second Appeal, the necessity to file an appeal against W.P.(C) NO.5365 OF 2009 :: 2 :: O.A.No.12172 of 1976 was realised and accordingly the Appeal was filed. There is a delay of thirty years in filing the Appeal before the Appellate Authority. 4. The decree in O.S.No.315 of 1986 was put in execution. The petitioner objected to the execution. The objections were overruled by the executing court. Though the petitioner filed C.R.P.No.73 of 2009 against that order, that Revision was dismissed as withdrawn. 5. The application for condonation of delay in filing A.A.No.79 of 2008 is pending before the Appellate Authority (LR), Kannur. Whatever may be the merits of the application, it has to be disposed of. Though the prayer of the petitioner is to dispose of the Appeal, namely, A.A.No.79 of 2008, in fact, the prayer is to dispose of the application for condonation of the delay and if the delay is condoned, to dispose of the Appeal. 6. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the application for condonation of delay, there will be a direction to the Appellate Authority to dispose of the application for condonation of W.P.(C) NO.5365 OF 2009 :: 3 :: delay in filing A.A.No.79 of 2008 expeditiously, after affording an opportunity of being heard to all the parties concerned. The Appellate Authority shall dispose of the application within a period of six months. It is made clear that I have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the contentions raised by the parties. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/