IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 16TH MARCH 2009 / 25TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 4701 of 2009(I) ------------------------- AS.177/2008 of ADDL.DISTRICT COURT-I,MAVELIKKARA OS.294/2004 of MUNSIFF COURT,HARIPAD .................... PETITIONER(S): IST RESPONDENT: ---------------------------------------------------- K. MADHU, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O. KRISHNAN NAIR, 'KRISHNA KRIPA', PEROORKADA.P.O, TRIVANDRUM-5. BY ADV. MR.S.SHANAVAS KHAN RESPONDENT(S): APPELLANT/2ND RESPONDENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. M. MURALEEDHARAN NAIR, AGED 59 YEARS, S/O. MADHAVAN NAIR, KUMARAPURAM.P.O, HARIPAD, NOW RESIDING AT 'NEELAVANA HOUSE', ODAMKUZHI LANE, POOJAPURA.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.4701 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner filed O.S.No.294 of 2004on the file of the Munsiff’s Court, Haripad, for declaration and permanent prohibitory injunction. The trial court decreed the suit on 30.7.2008. The first respondent filed A.S.No.177 of 2008 on the file of the Additional District Court-I, Mavelikara. I.A.No.1525 of 2008 filed by the first respondent for stay of execution. On 27.11.2008, the appellate court granted stay. It is stated that the case was posted to 5.1.2009 for return of notice. On that day, the petitioner filed Ext.P8 application (I.A.No.31 of 2009) to vacate the stay order passed on 27.11.2008. The grievance of the petitioner is that the court below did not hear and dispose of I.A.No.31 of 2009 and the case is now posted to 16.6.2009. The only prayer made by the petitioner is to issue a direction to Additional District Court, Mavelikara to dispose of I.A.No.31 of 2009 in A.S.No.177 of 2008 expeditiously. Though the respondents were served with notice, there is no appearance for WPC No.4701/2009 2 them. Though the standing counsel appeared for the second respondent on 19.2.2009, it now transpires that no memo of appearance was filed. 2. When the petitioner has filed an application for vacating the interim order of stay, it is only just and reasonable to dispose of the same at the earliest. It is also pointed out that the petitioner had filed a caveat. But, it was filed in Sub Court instead of the District Court. The appeal was filed before the District Court and therefore, the petitioner could not oppose the grant of stay. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be a direction to the Additional District Court, Mavelikara to dispose of I.A.No.31 of 2009 in A.S.No.177 of 2008 expeditiously and at any rate before the closure of the court for summer holidays. The court below shall advance the hearing of I.A.No.31 of 2009, hear the parties and dispose of the same. The Writ Petition is allowed as above. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl