IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD NOVEMBER 2011 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA 1933 OP(C).No. 3814 of 2011(O) -------------------------------- AS.82/2010 of SUB COURT, NEDUMANGAD .................... PETITIONER --------------- SHAMNATH A.RAHIM, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL RAHIM, DILSHAD MANZIL, KAZHAKKOTTAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SMT.DAISY A.PHILIPOSE RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. SEENA, SREE SHAILAM, KUNDARA P.O., PIN - 691 501. 2. SAINA, VARNAM HOUSE, KOPPAM, VITHURA, CHITTUVETTU MURI, THOLICODE P.O.PIN - 691 501. 3. LAJI, VARNAM HOUSE, KOPPAM, VITHURA, CHITTUVETTU MURI, THOLICODE P.O.PIN - 691 501. 4. SAJU, KOLLOOR BUILDINGS, THONNAKKAL P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 5. V.H.SANIL, VARNAM HOUSE, KOPPAM,VITHURA, CHITTUVETTU MURI, THOLICODE P.O.PIN - 691 501. THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/11/2011, ALONG WITH OPC. NO.3818/2011 OPC. NO.3815/2011 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 3814/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL IN A.S. NO.82 OF 2010 ON THE FILES OF THE SUB COURT, NEDUMANGAD. P2: COPY OF I.A. NO.527/2011 IN A.S. NO.82/2010 ON THE FILES OF THE SUB COURT, NEDUMANGAD. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- O.P(C).Nos.3814, 3815 and 3818 of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this 23rd day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT In these petitions, petitioner seeks a direction to the learned Sub Judge, Nedumangad for early disposal of A.S.Nos.82, 83 and 84 of 2010. Learned counsel submits that those appeals arise from the judgment and decree in O.S.Nos.210, 227 and 237 of 2007 of the Court of learned Munsiff, Nedumangad. According to the learned counsel, those suits are filed by the legal representatives of the defendants in O.S.No.885 of 1960 and in execution of the decree. Petitioner claims to have got title and possession of the property on 23.02.2007 in execution of the decree in O.S.No.885 of 1960. It is pointed out that O.S.Nos.210, 227 and 237 of 2010 were dismissed against which plaintiffs therein have preferred appeals - A.S.Nos. 82, 83 and 84 of 2010. It is also pointed out that petitioner had filed applications in the said appeals for advancing hearing and accordingly the appeals were advanced but were again adjourned. Learned counsel submits that since the litigation started in the year, 1960 it is necessary that the appeals are disposed of as early as possible. O.P(C).Nos.3814, 3815 and 3818 of 2011 -: 2 :- 2. Though the appeals are of the year 2010 and the suits from which those appeals arose are of the year 2007, it would appear from the submission of learned counsel that roots of the litigations goes back to 1960. But without understanding the volume of work of the Court concerned, it is not proper for this Court to issue any direction for time bound disposal of the case. I must also bear in mind that as pointed out by learned counsel on the request of petitioner hearing of the appeals was once advanced. In the circumstance, it is open to the petitioner to request learned Sub Judge to advance hearing of appeals and if any such request is made, learned Sub Judge shall consider the request and pass appropriate orders. These original petitions are disposed of as above. (THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-