KUMAR. S Vs. SARASWATHIAMMA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The main prayer in this Original Petition (Civil) filed under the enabling provisions of Article 227 of the Constitution of India is as follows :

(2.) Heard Sri.Mathew Skaria, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Regi George, learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent. Though notice has been duly served on the other respondents, there is no appearance for those parties.

(3.) Sri.Mathew Skaria, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the limited direction sought for by the petitioner in this case is only for a direction from this Court to ensure that the trial court concerned (Principal Sub Court, Kottayam) will hear and dispose of Ext.P1 Suit, O.S. No.541/2011 filed by the petitioner, without much delay. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner along with his predecessor in interest had filed O.S. No.341/2006 before the Munsiff's Court, Changanacherry for a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction against the respondents herein. But that suit was dismissed stating that the petitioners are not in physical possession of the property. Thereafter, the petitioners had filed Appeal Suit, A.S. No.95/2008. Though the first appellate court had also dismissed the appeal finding that the petitioners are not having possession of the property, but observed that their right in the property is not lost and they can institute suit properly for declaration of title and recovery of possession. Against the dismissal of the appeal the petitioners had preferred RSA No.585/2011 before this Court. The petitioners have also filed O.S. No.541/2011 before the Principal Sub Court, Kottayam for declaration of title and for recovery of possession from the respondents herein. While the Suit came up for consideration, on the basis of the submission made by the plaintiff's counsel that RSA is pending before this Court, the court below passed the impugned Ext.P3 order. Against Ext.P3 order the petitioner has preferred this OP(C).