IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH AUGUST 2010 / 13TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 35892 of 2009(O) -------------------------- OS.638/1998 of MUNSIFF COURT,ALUVA .................... PETITIONER: --------------- ANEES, W/O.THOMAS, AGED 49 YEARS, POONELI HOUSE, PULLUVAZHI KARA, PERUMBAVOOR VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.PAUL K.VARGHESE RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. AMMINI, W/O.KUMARAN, NOW RESIDING AT THEKKEDATH, CHALAKKUDY KARA, CHALAKKUDY VILLAGE. 2. SHINY, D/O.KUMARAN, NOW RESIDING AT THEKEDATH, CHALAKKUDY KARA, CHALAKKUDY VILLAGE. 3. PRADEEP, S/O.KUMARAN, NOW RESIDING AT THEKKEDATH, CHALAKKUDY KARA, CHALAKKUDY VILLAGE. 4. PRAKASAN, S/O.KUMARAN, NOW RESIDING AT THEKKEDATH, CHALAKKUDY KARA, CHALAKKUDY VILLAGE. 5. RADHA, D/O.RAGHAVAN, CHENGALATH VEETTIL, MALAYATTOOR KARA, MALAYATTOOR VILLAGE, PERUMBAVOOR. 6. FRANCIS, S/O.OUSEPH, VADAKKEVETTIL, ILLITHODUKARA, MALAYATTOOR. ADV. SRI.K.JAYAKUMAR FOR R4 SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN FOR R4 SMT.GEETHA P.MENON FOR R4 SRI.M.N.MANOJ FOR R1 SRI.V.C.VALSAN FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 35892 of 2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 : EXECUTION PETITION No.56 OF 2009 FILED THE RESPONDENT Nos.1 TO 4 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT, ALUVA DTD. 21-05-2009 EXHIBIT P2 : E.A.No.98 OF 2009 IN E.P.No..56 OF 2009 OF THE MUNSIFF COURT DTD. 23-07-2009. EXHIBIT P3 : ORDER IN E.P.No.56 OF 2009 IN O.S.No.638 OF 1998 OF the MUNSIFF COURT DATED 07.12.2009 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL True Copy P.A to Judge THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.C.No.35892 of 2009 --------------------------------------- Dated this 04th day of August, 2010 JUDGMENT This writ petition is in challenge of Ext.P3, order directing delivery of property as directed in the decree. Respondents/plaintiffs obtained a decree for possession of the suit property referred to in Ext.C1, plan from petitioner and defendant No.2. In the course of execution proceedings it was revealed that defendant No.2 expired and thereon some steps were taken to implead legal representatives of defendant No.2. On 07-12-2009 respondent/decree holder filed a memo to the effect that no steps are required against legal representatives of deceased defendant No.2 since they are not in possession of the suit property directed to be given in the possession of respondent. Thereon after hearing petitioner and respondent learned Munsiff vide Ext.P3, order has ordered delivery and directed Amin of that court to deliver vacant possession of the property as per decree and Ext.C1, plan with the assistance of a qualified surveyor. That order is under challenge. 2. There are several contentions urged against Ext.P3, order. I do not find any merit or substance in the same. Petitioner did not prefer any objection to the execution petition. The decree W.P.C.No.35892 of 2009 : 2 : has become final, it is not disputed and hence it has to be obeyed. Decree directs surrender and possession of the suit property described in Ext.C1, plan and what executing court has ordered as per Ext.P3, order in only to deliver that property with the assistance of a qualified surveyor. Therefore there can be no doubt that the property described in Ext.C1, plan and decree schedule will be delivered over to the respondent. There is no merit in this writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner has requested some time to surrender possession of the property. Having regard to the circumstances stated I am inclined to grant one months' time to the petitioner to surrender possession of the property. Resultantly, this writ petition is dismissed but, petitioner is granted one months' time from this day to surrender possession of the property referred to in the decree schedule and Ext.C1, plan to the respondents on condition that petitioner filed an affidavit in the executing court within two weeks from this day undertaking to surrender possession on the expiry of the said period of one month. In case affidavit is not filed within the said time or, petitioner does not surrender possession of the property within the time granted hereby it will be open to the respondents to proceed with execution pursuant to Ext.P3, order. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/- W.P.C.No.35892 of 2009 : 3 : The Sentence “Learned counsel for petitioner has requested some time to surrender possession of the property” occurring in the 3rd paragraph (page 2) of the judgment dated 04-08-2010 in W.P.(C). No.35892/2009 is deleted as per order dated 30-08-2010 in I.A.No.11833/2010. Sd/- Registrar (Judicial)