IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 29TH JUNE 2010 / 8TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).NO. 20140 OF 2010(O) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN EA 453/10,EA 573/2010 IN OS.601/2005 OF II ADDL.M.C.,NEYYATTINKARA .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- PUSHKARAN, S/O.GANGADHARAN, AGED 48 YEARS, PATHIRISSERI VEEDU, KADAVATTARAM DESOM, NEYYATTINKARA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.V.C.MADHAVANKUTTY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- VIJAYAN, S/O.GOPALAN, PATHIRISSERI VADAKKE PUTHEN VEEDU, KADAVATTARAM DESOM, NEYYATTINKARA VILLAGE, PIN - 695 121, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== W.P(C) NO.20140 of 2010 ==================================== Dated this the 29th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner before me is the judgment debtor/additional defendant No.6 in E.P. No.13 of 2010 in O.S.No.601 of 2005 of the court of learned Munsiff, Neyyattinkara. Respondent filed the suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession and there was an ex parte decree on 28.10.2006 which was set aside on the application of defendants on 14.12.2006. It is thereafter that petitioner was impleaded as additional defendant No.6. That was followed by a decree in favour of respondent. He filed E.P.No.13 of 2010 for execution of decree on 16.01.2010. In the meantime contending that decree in O.S. No.No.601 of 2005 does not bind the petitioner he filed O.S. No. 488 of 2010 on 24.05.2010 and sought declaration to that effect. He also filed application under order XXI Rule 29 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, “the Code”) as E.A. No.453 of 2010 in the executing court for stay of execution pending disposal of O.S.No.488 of 2010. That application was dismissed on 31.05.2010 by Ext.P6, order stating that petitioner was set ex parte on 01.03.2010 and O.S.No.488 of W.P(C) No.20140 of 2010 -: 2 :- 2010 is not maintainable in view of the provisions of Order XXIII Rule 3A of the Code. Thereon petitioner filed I.A.No.573 of 2010 to set aside Ext.P6, order against him. Now grievance of petitioner is that before setting aside the ex parte order property is going to be delivered over to respondent on 30.06.2010. Petitioner therefore seeks disposal of I.A. No.573 of 2010 and prays that until then delivery proceedings may be kept in abeyance. Learned counsel states that unless the proceedings are kept in abeyance petitioner will be put to irreparable loss and injury. 2. Having regard to the circumstances of the case I direct the executing court to dispose of E.A. No.573 of 2010 as early as possible. Writ Petition is disposed of as above. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv