IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2011 / 20TH SRAVANA 1933 OP(C).No. 2655 of 2011(O) -------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN E.P.NO. 506/2008 IN OS.NO. 1180/2000 of III ADDL.MUNSIFF COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER: ---------------------- BHASURA, D/O.INDIRA, RESIDING AT KOCHUKANNANPALLIL, PANMANA VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT.PIN-690 518 BY ADV. SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN SMT.GEETHA P.MENON SRI.P.B.SUBRAMANYAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. OMANA, D/O.THAMARAKSHI, RESIDING AT PONGUVILA VEEDU, KIDARAKUZHY, VENGANOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 523. 2. SUKUMARAN, S/O.AYYAPPAN, RESIDING AT NEDIYAVILA VEEDU, PIRAVILAKOM, VIZHUNJAN VILLAGE, NEYYATTINKARA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-696 121. BY THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts OP(C)NO.2655/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.S.NO.1180 OF 2000, III ADDL.MUNSIFF'S COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, DATED 29/1/2002. P2 COPY OF THE DECREE IN O.S.NO.1180 OF 2000, III ADDL.MUNSIFF'S COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, DATED 29/1/2002. P3 COPY OF THE E.P.NO.506 OF 2008 IN O.S.NO.1180 OF 2000, MUNSIFF'S COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, DATED 26/11/2008. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts THOMAS.P. JOSEPH, J ------------------------------------ O.P(C).No. 2655 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------- Dated 11th August, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner has obtained a decree for recovery of possession in O.S.No.1180 of 2000 of the court of learned Third Additional Munsiff, Thiruvananthapuram. He filed E.P.No.506 of 2008 to execute the decree. I am told that respondents/judgment debtors remained absent in the execution petition and hence they were set exparte. Later, the first respondent/ judgment debtor No.1 filed an application to set aside exparte order against him (in execution) and to condone the delay. 2. The grievance of petitioner is that the said applications are posted on 12.10.2011. Learned counsel submits that if the request of first respondent/judgment debtor No.1 is to hear him also in the execution petition, petitioner has no objection to that, but on that ground that execution proceedings may not be delayed undefinitely, it is argued. It is therefore prayed that a direction may be given to the learned Munsiff to advance hearing OP(C). No.2655/11 2 of the applications and dispose of the same, as well as the execution petition as early as possible. 3. Without understanding the volume of work of court concerned, I do not think it appropriate to issue any direction for time bound disposal of the execution petition and the pending applications. But the applications filed by the first respondent to set aside the exparte order (in execution) and to condone the delay have to be disposed of as early as possible particularly as petitioner says that he has no objection in hearing the first respondent also in the execution proceeding and the proceeding in E.P.No.506 of 2008 is also to be expedited. 4. Now that the applications above referred are posted on 12.10.2011 I make it clear that it is open to the petitioner to move appropriate application before the learned Munsiff to advance hearing of the said applications with notice to the first respondent who has preferred those applications and if any such request is made, learned Munsiff shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders having regard to the grievance of petitioner and his submission that he has no objection in hearing the first respondent also in the execution proceeding, and OP(C). No.2655/11 3 expedite the further proceeding in execution. With the above direction this Original Petition is disposed of. THOMAS.P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. Sou.