IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 14TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 25TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 5411 of 2008(T) ------------------------- OS.2/2008 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER: --------------------- INDULEKHA,D/O. SANTHA NAIR, AGED 42 YEARS, INDEEVARAM, MARUTHOORKADAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.SURESH SRI.G.SUDHEER RESPONDENT: ----------------------- CHANDRASEKHARAN NAIR,S/O. KUMARA PILLAI, JANAKI MANDIRAM, LEKSHMI NAGAR,EDAGRAMOM, KARUMAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No.5411 OF 2008 -------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of February, 2008 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~~ This writ petition is preferred with a prayer to set aside Ext.P4 order or in the alternate to give a direction to the 2nd Additional Subordinate Judge, Thiruvananthapuram to dispose of Exts.P3, P6, P7 applications within a stipulated time. Ext.P4 is an order of ex parte injunction passed in I.A.No.19/2008 in O.S.No.2/2008. Ext.P6 is a counter affidavit filed in the said application by the writ petitioner for vacating the order of injunction and Ext.P7 is an application to vacate Ext.P4 order as it is against the provisions of law for the reason that in spite of the caveat order of injunction has been passed without notice. 2. So far as the prayer to vacate Ext.P4, I feel this court shall not do it for the reason that the writ petitioner has moved before court for vacating the order and also has filed an application for injunction against the plaintiff. The legality or the validity of the injunction order issued also is questioned by virtue of another application. Therefore, it is sufficient if appropriate direction is given to the court to consider and W.P.(C) No.5411/2008 2 dispose of Exts.P3, P6, P7 applications within a stipulated time. The Civil Procedure Code under Order 39 Rule 3(A) mandates that as far as possible this application should be disposed of within a period of thirty days unless there are sufficient grounds to extend the same. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of directing 2nd Additional Subordinate Judge, Trivandrum to dispose of Exts.P3, P6 and P7 applications in O.S.No.2/2008 as expeditiously as possible, within a time frame of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. (M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE) ps