The High Court held that the petitioner must pursue remedies in the pending appeal before the Sub Court rather than approaching the High Court under Article 227. The writ petition was not entertained, with a direction to expedite the stay application.
Writ petition not entertained; respondent directed to expedite proceedings on stay application in Sub Court.
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 THOMAS P.JOSEPH
MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2013/22ND MAGHA 1934
OP(C).No. 557 of 2013 (O)
AGAINST ORDER OF DELIVERY PASSED IN E.P.100/2012 IN O.S.NO.27/2011 IN THE FILES OF Prl.MUNSIFF'S COURT, KOCHI
PETITIONER(S):
ARUNKUMAR, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O. RAJAN, BUSINESS, MANASSERY HOUSE, RAMESWARAM VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK.
BY ADVS.SRI.T.JAYAKRISHNAN SRI.R.KRISHNAKUMAR (CHERTHALA)
RESPONDENT(S):
LEELA RAJAN W/O. RAJAN, MANASSERY HOUSE, C.C 18/489, PALLURUTHY VADAKKUM MURI, RAMESWARAM VILLAGE KOCHI TALUK - 682 006.
BY
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11-02-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
DG
OP(C).No. 557 of 2013 (O)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT-P1- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT PASSED IN O.S 27/2011 IN THE FILES OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, KOCHI DATED 04/11/2011.
EXHIBIT-P2- COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BY THE PETITIONER AGAINST EXHIBIT-P1 JUDGMENT AS A.S NO. 5/2012 DATED 09/01/2012.
EXHIBIT-P3- COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN A.S 5/2012 DATED 05/021/2013 IN I.A 44/2013.
EXHIBIT-P4- COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN E.P 100/2012 AS E.A 277/2012.
EXHIBIT-P5- COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE RESPONDENT TO EXHIBIT-P4 PETITION DATED 20/12/2012.
EXHIBIT-P6- COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE MUNSFFI COURT, KOCHI IN EXHIBIT-P4 PETITION DATED 20/12/2012.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS - NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A TO JUDGE
DG
THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Original Petition (Civil) No. 557 of 2013
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 11th day of February, 2013
JUDGMENT
Petitioner seeks a direction or order setting aside Ext.P6, order and directing the Principal Munsiff, Kochi not to dispossess petitioner and family from the residential building until a finality is reached in the challenge to Ext.P1, judgment or till Ext.P3, application is considered and disposed of by the learned Sub Judge, Kochi.
Original Petition (Civil) No. 557 of 2013
-2-
posted to this day.
and decree of the trial court in the Sub Court, Kochi in A.S. No.5 of 2012 and application for stay is filed therein, petitioner has to work out his remedy in that appeal. He cannot circumvent that and move this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. There is ample opportunity available to the petitioner to get appropriate orders on I.A. No.44 of 2013 of the Sub Court, Kochi. Hence this original petition cannot be entertained. However learned Sub Judge, Kochi is directed to expedite proceeding on I.A. No.44 of 2013 in A.S. No.5 of 2012.
With the above direction this original petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
THOMAS P. JOSEPH JUDGE
//True copy//
P.A. TO JUDGE
shg/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition challenging an order directing delivery of possession when a regular appeal and interim stay application pending in the subordinate court.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
ARUNKUMAR
LEELA RAJAN
THOMAS P JOSEPH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
