IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2009 / 28TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 29397 of 2009(O) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- R.SARALAMONY, W/O. RAJACHANDRAN, RESIDING AT RAJARAM, PULIYARAKONAM, P.O.VILAPPIL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. MR.T.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. KERALA POLICE HOUSING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO.4348, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-20, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. M.E.JOSE, RESIDING AT TC 26/644, MUNDAKKAL HOUSE, OOTTUKUZHY LANE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY ADV. MR.N.JAMES KOSHY. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/10/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------- W.P.(C).No.29397 OF 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of October 2009 ------------------------------------- JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs. i) To declare that Ext. P9 exparte decree and judgment passed by the learned First Additional Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram, are null, void and unenforceable. ii) To set aside Ext.P9 judgment and decree passed by the learned First Additional Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram. iii) To direct the learned First Additional Sub Judge, Thiruvananthapuram to reconsider matter afresh after hearing the petition in accordance with law. iv) To stay all further proceedings in E.P No.1/1998 in O.S No.695/1995 on the files of the learned First Additional Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram. W.P.(C).No.29397 OF 2009 Page numbers v) Issue such other writ or order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may be fit in the circumstances of the case. 2. At the time of hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the execution proceedings initiated on the basis of Ext.P9 exparte decree, petitioner has already moved an application under Order 21 Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure setting forth his claim over one of the plots covered by the decree, and that petition still remains to be adjudicated by the court. When that be so, petitioner can canvass the remedy available to him under law in the petition so moved before the execution court. Reserving the right of the petitioner to do so, the writ petition is closed. Sd/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE vdv