Disposed

Safeena v. Muhammed Najeeb

Kerala HC6 Jun 2024OP(C)/400/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of an original civil petition. It directed the Munsiff Court to decide pending petitions to set aside an ex-parte decree and to condone delay within two months, while deferring execution proceedings pending that disposal.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Munsiff Court to dispose of I.A.No.1 of 2022 and R.P.No.78 of 2022 within two months; deferment of execution proceedings.

Safeena Vs Muhammed Najeeb — Specific Performance | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 6^TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 16TH JYAISHTA, 1946

¶5

OP(C) NO. 400 OF 2023

¶6

OS NO.319 OF 2015 OF MUNSIFF COURT,KAYAMKULAM

¶7

PETITIONER/2ND RESPONDENT:

¶8

SAFEENA

¶9

AGED 46 YEARS

¶10

D/O. ABDULLAKUTTY S.J HOUSE, ALAVILA KUNDAYAM P.O., PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM, PIN - 689695

¶11

BY ADVS. T.M.ABDUL LATHEEF NITHIN A.R.

¶12

RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & 1ST RESPONDENT:

¶13

1 MUHAMMED NAJEEB

¶14

AGED 60 YEARS S/O.KOCHUKUNJU, NYNARETHU HOUSE, ERUVAMURI, PATHIYOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM, PIN – 689695 (DIED)

¶15

2 AJINAS

¶16

AGED 55 YEARS S/O. ABDULLAKUTTY KOTTAKKATTU VADAKKETHIL HOUSE PERINGALA, KAYAMKULAM, ALLAPUZHA PIN-690559,

¶17

ADDL.R3 NABEESATH

¶18

AGED 50 YEARS W/O MUHAMMED NAJEEB, NYNARETHU HOUSE, ERUVAMURI, PATHIYOORVILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA 689695

¶19

ADDL.R4 NAVAS

¶20

AGED 30 YEARS S/O MUHAMMED NAJEEB, NYNARETHU HOUSE, ERUVAMURI, PATHIYOOR VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA 689695

¶21

ADD.R5 NAJEEMA

¶22

OP(C) NO. 400 OF 2023

¶23

: 2 :-

¶24

AGED 28 YEARS D/O MUHAMMED NAJEEB, NYNARETHU HOUSE, ERUVAMURI, PATHIYOOR VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA 689695 ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS 3 TO 5 ARE IMPLEADED AS THE LEGAL HEIRS OF R1 VIDE ORDER DATED 31.01.2024 IN IA 1/2024.

¶25

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶26

OP(C) NO. 400 OF 2023

¶27

: 3 :-

¶28

J U D G M E N T

¶29

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. There is no appearance for the respondents.

¶30

nd st 2 . The petitioner is the 2 defendant, the 1 respondent is the plaintiff and the 2 nd respondent is the 1 st defendant in O.S.No.319 of 2015 on the files of the Munsiff Court, Kayamkulam (for short, the trial court'). During the pendency of this original petition, the 1 st respondent died and his legal heirs were impleaded as additional respondents 3 to 5.

¶31

3 . The suit is one for specific performance of contract and for permanent prohibitory injunction. The petitioner was set ex-parte, and an ex-parte decree was passed against her. She filed an application to set aside the ex-parte decree as R.P.No.78 of 2022 and also I.A.No.1 of 2022 to condone the delay in filing the petition to set aside the ex-parte decree. They are still pending. In the meanwhile, the plaintiff filed the execution petition as E.P.No.44 of 2020 to execute the decree. This Court, as per the order dated 16.02.2023, passed an interim order deferring further proceedings in E.P.No.44 of 2020.

¶32

OP(C) NO. 400 OF 2023

¶33

: 4 :-

¶34

4 . The petitioner filed the petition to set aside the ex-parte decree as well as the petition to condone the delay as early as in 2022, but so far, they have not been disposed of. In the letter dated 21.02.2023, the learned Munsiff reported that those petitions could be disposed of within one month.

¶35

Considering all these aspects, this original petition is disposed of with a direction to the Munsiff Court, Kayamkulam, to dispose of I.A.No.1 of 2022 and R.P.No.78 of 2022 within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till the disposal of those petitions, further proceedings in E.P.No.44 of 2020 shall be deferred.

¶36

Sd/-

¶37

DR.KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, JUDGE

¶38

¶39

OP(C) NO. 400 OF 2023

¶40

: 5 :-

¶41

APPENDIX OF OP(C) 400/2023

¶42

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶43

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CASE DETAILS CONTAINED IN THE E-COURTS EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS NO. 319/2015 DATED 23/5/2015 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OS NO.319/2015 OF DATED 30/11/2017 OF MUNSIFF COURT KAYAMKULAM EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 19/11/2021 EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE DIARY PROCEEDINGS IN EP NO.44/2020 OF MUNSIFF COURT KAYAMKULAM

¶44

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION TO STAY THE EXECUTION PROCEEDINGS IN E.A. NO.1/23 IN EP NO.44/2020 DATED 3/1/2023 EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION TO CONDONE DELAY IN RP NO.78/2022 I.A. NO.1/22 IN OS NO.319/2015 DATED 19/12/2022

¶45

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER E.A. NO.1/23 IN EP NO.44/2020 DATED 13/1/2023

¶46

EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION TO SETASIDE EXPARTY DECREE IN RP NO.78/2022 IN I.A. NO.1/22 IN OS NO.319/2015 DATED 19/12/2022

Safeena v. Muhammed Najeeb

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Safeena v. Muhammed Najeeb

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sulochana Vs State of Kerala

Rincy R Vs Siyad E

Rincy .R Vs Siyad. E

Thomas v D Vs Prasanth v S

Thomas v D Vs Prasanth v S

Thomas v D Vs Prasanth