IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 18TH MAY 2010 / WPCH VAISAKHA 1932 WP(C).No. 7364 of 2010(O) ------------------------- OP.195/2007 of FAMILY COURT, KOTTARAKKARA OS.74/2007 of SUB COURT,KOTTARAKKARA .................... PETITIONER: --------------- SURESH, S/O.NEELAKANDAN ACHARY, RESIDING AT VILAYILAZHIKATHU, MANI BHAVAN, ALTHARAMOODU CHERRY, KADAKKAL MURI, KADAKKAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JOHNSON GOMEZ RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. NIZAR AHAMMED, S/O ABBAS, RESIDING AT LAILA MANZIL, KADAKKAL MURI, KADAKKAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. HASEENA, AGED 35 YEARS, W/O.NIZAR AHAMMED, RESIDING AT SAFEEK MANZIL, PALLIMUKKU, KADAKKAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT, FROM THAHIRA MANZIL, ANAPPARA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.C.No.7364 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this 18th day of May, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner, claiming that there is an agreement for purchase of the suit property between himself and respondent No.1 as per an agreement dated 01-03-2007 has filed O.S.No.74 of 2007 before the Sub Court, Kottarakkara for specific performance of that agreement for sale. In the meantime, respondent No.2 who is the wife of respondent No.1 has filed O.P.No.195 of 2007 in the Family Court, Kottarakkara for maintenance including arrears of maintenance and attached the property. Petitioner filed I.A.No.1246 of 2007 in O.P.No.195 of 2007 for his impleadment but that application was dismissed by Ext.P7, order. Later, petitioner has filed Ext.P9, claim petition in O.P.No.195 of 2007 claiming that the said proceeding is the result of collusion between respondent Nos.1 and 2 and when respondent No.1. The prayer in the petition is to direct transfer of O.S.No.74 of 2007 to the Family Court, Kottarakkara for disposal along with O.P.No.195 of 2007. Now petitioner has amended the petition to issue direction to learned Sub Judge, Kottarakkara to dispose of Ext.P5, suit as expeditiously as possible. Learned counsel submits that if O.S.No.74 of 2007 is W.P.C.No.7364 OF 2010 : 2 : not disposed of immediately there is the possibility of divergent findings being entered in O.P.No.195 of 2007 and Ext.P5 suit. 2. So far as the case of petitioner in respect of the claim made by respondent No.2 as against respondent No.1 in the Family Court is concerned, he has already taken up the matter in that court by way of Ext.P9, claim petition, where he can agitate that question. So far as disposal of O.S.No.74 of 2007 is concerned, I make it clear that it will be open to the petitioner to request the learned Sub Judge, if the pre-trial steps are over for expeditious trial and disposal of that case. If any such request is made learned Sub Judge shall consider the request on the facts and circumstances of the case and pass appropriate orders. With the above directions the writ petition is closed. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-