Disposed

Jaya Ramachandran Nair v. K.Mohanan Chandran Nair

Kerala HC8 Dec 2016OP(C)/2723/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In OP(C).No.2723 of 2016, the High Court of Kerala considered a petition under Article 227 seeking speedy disposal of a pending partition suit invoking senior citizen provisions. The Court directed the Additional Munsiff Court to dispose of the matter within nine months.

What did the court decide?

The Court directed the Third Additional Munsiff Court, Thiruvananthapuram, to dispose of OS.No.961/2015 within nine months from the date of receipt of the judgment.

Jaya Ramachandran Nair Vs K.Mohanan Chandran… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2016/17TH AGRAHAYANA, 1938

¶5

OP(C).No. 2723 of 2016 (O)

¶6

OS 961/2015 of II ADDL. MUSNIFF'S COURT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 29-06-2015

¶7

PETITIONER(S):

¶8

1. JAYA RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

¶9

AGED 71 YEARS, W/O RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, SURABHI, T.C.NO.30/1385, V.V.ROAD, PETTAH PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶10

2. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, AGED 80 YEARS, SURABHI, T.C.NO.30/1985, V.V.ROAD, PETTAH PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶11

3. ARJUN RAVIKUMAR, S/O RAVIKUMAR, PRIYA, T.C.30/1396, PETTAH PO,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶12

BY ADVS.SRI.D.SAJEEV

¶13

SMT.LIGEY ANTONY

¶14

RESPONDENT(S):

¶15

K.MOHANAN CHANDRAN NAIR

¶16

AGED 63 YEARS, S/O KESAVA PILLAI, T.C.NO.3/1226, LAKSHMI NAGAR, PATTOM PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695004.

¶17

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08-12-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

MLG

¶19

OP(C).No. 2723 of 2016 (O)

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶22

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS.NO.961 OF 2015 ON THE FILE OF THE 2ND ADDL.MUNSIFF'S COURT OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶23

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT AND PETITION FILED AS I.A.NO.1503/2015 IN OS.NO.961 OF 2015 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶24

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT DATED 29.6.2015 FILED IN OS.NO.961 OF 2015 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶25

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT AND PETITION DATED 29.9.2016 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT IN OS.NO.961 OF 2015 ON THE FILE OF THE 2ND ADDL. MUSNIFF'S COURT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶26

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S.TO JUDGE

MLG

K. RAMAKRISHNAN, J.

¶31

....................................... O.P.(C).No.2723 of 2016

¶32

Dated this the 8^th day of December, 2016.

¶33

JUDGMENT

¶34

This is a petition filed by the petitioners seeking intervention of this court for speedy disposal of OS.No.961/2015 pending before the Second Additional Munsiff Court, Thiruvananthapuram under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

¶35

It is alleged in the petition that the petitioners are the plaintiffs in Ext.P1 suit OS.961/2015 pending before the Second Additional Munsiff Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The suit was filed for partition. The petitioners have also filed an application for interim injunction evidenced by Ext.P2 as IA.No.1503/2016. The respondent filed Ext.P3 written statement. The steps are complete. The matter was referred for mediation, but it was not settled in the mediation. So they have no other option except seeking the following relief:

¶36

“To direct the Hon'ble Munsiff's Court, Thiruvananthapuram to dispose of Ext.P1 suit as expeditiously as possible, within a time frame”.

¶37

Considering the nature of relief claimed, this court felt

¶38

that the petition can be disposed of after getting a report from the concerned court regarding the present stage of the case and time required for disposal of the case and accordingly a report has been called for and the Second Additional Munsiff,

¶39

O.P.(C).No.2723 of 2016

¶40

¶41

Thiruvananthapuram has sent a report which reads as follows:

¶42

“xxxx xxxx. I am holding only the additional charge of this court and as per the order of the Honourable High Court, one day sitting in this court is being conducted on the last working day of every week. There are so may time limit cases pending in this Court as well as in the Additional Munsiff's Court-III. The O.P.(Election) petition of this Court are also transferred to my Court for speedy disposal. Since this suit is of the year 2015 it is also not included in the target.

¶43

In the circumstances, I most humbly request that nine months time may kindly be granted to dispose of the matter.”

¶44

Heard Sri.D. Sajeev, counsel appearing for the petitioners and perused the report.

¶45

It is seen from the report that there is no regular Munsiff for the Second Additional Munsiff Court, Thiruvananthapuarm and the Third Additional Munsiff is in charge of that court. It is also seen from the report that some of the election petitions were also transferred to that court for speedy disposal and much older cases than this case are pending before that court. However the Munsiff has expressed his willingness to dispose of the case within nine months. It is seen from the petition that petitioners 1 and 2 are senior citizens aged 71 and 80 years and the respondent is also a senior citizen and some priority must be given for disposal of the cases involving senior citizens. So

¶46

O.P.(C).No.2723 of 2016

¶47

¶48

considering the circumstances, this court feels that the petition can be disposed of as follows:

¶49

The Third Additional Munsiff Court, Thiruvananthapuram is directed to expedite the disposal of OS.No.961/2015 pending before the Additional Munsiff Court, Thiruvananthapuram as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within nine months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment as undertaken in the report.

¶50

Registry is directed to communicate a copy of this judgment to the court below at the earliest.

¶51

Sd/-

¶52

K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDGE.

¶53

Jaya Ramachandran Nair v. K.Mohanan Chandran Nair

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaya Ramachandran Nair v. K.Mohanan Chandran Nair

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bijo Varghese Vs the Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd.

Anitha Kumari.S Vs Jayasree

Kesavapilla Gopakumar Vs Padmanabha Pillai Kumaraswamy @ Palani

Deepa Joy Joseph Vs Linse Joseph

Susan Sarish Sunny Vs Dr.Sarish Mammen Sunny

Idol of Sree Asuramahakalan Temple Vs Muhammedkutty