This petition sought directions for the expeditious consideration of an interlocutory application regarding a property attachment. The High Court directed the lower court to hear the application as soon as possible, within a month if not immediately.
The original petition was disposed of with a direction to the court below to consider the filed application expeditiously.
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 SUNIL THOMAS
MONDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MAY 2019 / 30TH VAISAKHA, 1941
OP(C).No. 1334 of 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OS 218/2016 of MUNSIFF COURT,HARIPAD
PETITIONER/CLAIM PETITIONER IN O.S.NO218/2016:
SREEKUMAR
AGED 57 YEARS S/O. P.N. SHIVANANDAN, RESIDING AT PUTHENPARAMBIL HOUSE, KANJIPPADAM, KARIMADI, ALAPPUZHA-688 005.
BY ADVS. SRI.M.RETHEESHKUMAR SRI.LIJIN THAMBAN
RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFF/DEFENDANTS IN O.S.NO.218/2016:
1 SASIKUMAR,
AGED 57 YEARS, S/O RAGHAVAN, THATHVAMASI, PUTHIYAVILA MURI, ARATTUPUZHA VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-690502.
2 LAILAMMA,
AGED 57 YEARS, W/O. VASUDEVAN (LATE) , ANANDAVADIYI, PUTHIYAVILA MURI, ARATTUPUZHA VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-690 502.
3 DEVILAL, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O. VASUDEVAN (LATE), ANANDAVADIYI, PUTHIYAVILA MURI, ARATTUPUZHA VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-690 502.
4 THE SUB REGISTRAR, OFFICE OF THE SUB REGISTRAR KEERIKKAD KAREELAKULANGARA P.O.-690 572.
BY ADV. GOVERNMENT PLEADER GP SRI.DILIP .S
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20.05.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
OP(C).No. 1334 of 2019
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner herein is the petitioner in I.A.No.346/2019 in O.S.No.218/2016 pending before the Munsiff Court, Haripad which is a suit for money filed by the 1st respondent against the respondent nos. 2 and 3. The property covered by Ext.P1 was attached in the above suit by an order in I.A.No.1524/2016. According to the petitioner herein he had proposed to sell his property as eight plots and necessary stamp papers were purchased. When the documents were taken for execution of the sale deed it was brought to his notice that, the property was under attachment. Contending that, at the time of attachment the defendants did not have any alienable interest over the property, the petition was filed for vacating the order of attachment. Lamenting that, the above application is not taken up for hearing, though the respondents in that
interlocutory application have filed objection, petitioner has approached this court for appropriate
OP(C).No. 1334 of 2019
3
direction to the court below for an expeditious consideration of I.A.No.346/2019.
2. Though notices were served on the respondents, they have not chosen to appear and to contest the proceedings.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the
petitioner.
4. Evidently, the petitioner is entitled to be
heard on I.A.No.346/2019. According to the
petitioner herein service is complete in that I.A and the consideration of that I.A is being protracted by the respondents therein for one reason or another. It is submitted by the learned counsel
for the petitioner that, the matter now stands posted to 27.05.2019. Having considered the limited relief sought by the petitioner herein, I am inclined to dispose of the original petition itself
OP(C).No. 1334 of 2019
4
directing the Court below to take up and consider I.A.No. 346/2019, as expeditiously as possible, preferably on the next date of posting itself and if due to any reason and it is not possible to so dispose of, to dispose of the I.A. within a period of one month from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner is free to produce the copy of the above judgment before the Court below.
The original petition (civil) is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
SUNIL THOMAS
JUDGE
VPK
OP(C).No. 1334 of 2019
5
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
| EXHIBIT P1 | TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.1596/2013 OF KEERIKKAD SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE DATED 5.10.2013. |
|---|---|
| EXHIBIT P2 | TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 13.1.2014 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KANDALLUR. |
| EXHIBIT P3 | TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 10.1.2014 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KANDALLUR. |
| EXHIBIT P4 | TRUE COPY OF THE ATTACHMENT ORDER DATED 5.10.2016 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE MUNSIFF COURT, HARIPAD IN I.A.NO.1524/2016 IN OS 218/2016. |
| EXHIBIT P5 | TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 30.6.2018 PASSED BY THE MUNSIFF COURT, HARIPAD IN O.S.NO.218/2016. |
| EXHIBIT P6 | TRUE COPY OF THE DECREE DATED 30.6.2018 PASSED BY THE MUNSIFF COURT, HARIPAD IN O.S.NO.218/2016. |
| EXHIBIT P7 | TRUE COPY OF THE I.A.NO.346/2019 IN O.S.NO.218/2016 FILED IN MUNSIFF COURT, HARIPAD. |
| EXHIBIT P8 | TRUE COPY OF THE CHALLAN DATED 17.1.2019 EVIDENCING THE PAYMENT OF REGISTRATION FEES. |
| EXHIBIT P9 | TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 26.4.2019 FILED BEFORE THE SUB REGISTRAR, KEERIKKAD BY THE PETITIONER. |
| EXHIBIT P10 | TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION RAISED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE SUB REGISTRAR, DATED 26.4.2019. // TRUE COPY // |
PA TO JUDGE
VPK
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Karnataka High Court directed the lower court to expeditiously consider an interlocutory application for vacating an attachment order?
Whether the petitioner was entitled to directions for an expeditious hearing of the application?
SREEKUMAR
SASIKUMAR
LAILAMMA
DEVILAL
THE SUB REGISTRAR
SUNIL THOMAS
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
