Writ petition challenging delay in a suit for injunction. Court directed lower court to frame issues immediately and dispose suit within six months. Petition dismissed thereafter.
Direction to court below to frame issues immediately and dispose suit within six months. Writ petition closed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2009 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1931
WP(C).No. 29645 of 2009(O)
------------------------------------OS.179/2005 of MUNSIFF COURT, SASTHAMCOTTA ....................
PETITIONER(S):
------------------------
SANTHOSH KUMAR, S/O. GOPALAN NAIR, KURUPPANTHAYATH VEEDU, ANAYADI MURI, SOORANADU NORTH VILLAGE, KUNNATHOOR TALUK.
BY ADV. MR.T.GOPALAKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT(S):
------------------------
CHANDRASEKHARAN NAIR, S/O. CHELLAPPAN NAIR, CHITRANJALI, ANAYADI MURI, SOORANADU NORTH VILLAGE, KUNNATHOOR TALUK.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
tss
S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J.
W.P.(C).No.29645 OF 2009
Dated this the 3rd day of November 2009
JUDGMENT
The writ petition is filed seeking the
following reliefs.
i) Direct the Munsiff Court, Sasthamkotta to dispose O.S No.179/2005 pending before that court as expeditiously as possible within a period of one month.
ii) Issue such other order or direction
as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. Petitioner is the second defendant in
O.S No.179 of 05 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Sasthamcotta. Suit is one for injunction and the first respondent is the plaintiff. The grievance espoused in the writ petition is that even after
W.P.(C).No.29645 OF 2009 Page numbers
four years, the trial of the suit is considerably delayed and thereby the petitioner is put to severe hardship and irreparable injury. Petitioner seeks an early disposal of the suit by issuing appropriate writ/direction to the court below.
3. Having regard to the submissions made
and taking note of the facts and circumstances presented, a report from the learned Munsiff was
called for. It is reported that the case now stands posted for framing of issues on 12/01/2010. It is further reported, the suit can be given top priority so that its trial can be speeded up for its disposal at an early date. Considering the fact that issues have not been framed till date, I direct the court below to advance the posting with notice to both parties and frame issues on the basis of the pleadings of the parties at an early date, and, then, after providing reasonable
W.P.(C).No.29645 OF 2009 Page numbers
opportunity to both sides to dispose the suit as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is closed.
Sd/-
S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE
//TRUE COPY//
P.A TO JUDGE
vdv
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Munsiff Court should be directed to expedite the trial of a delayed suit by framing issues and disposing within six months.
Whether a writ direction can be issued to speed up the disposal of a inheritance/suit pending for four years.
Santhosh Kumar
Chandrasekharan Nair
S.S.Satheesachandan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
