SHIBU Vs. PRADEEPKUMAR

JUDGEMENT

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

(2.) Heard Sri.Sreekumar G. (Chelur), learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Manoj Ramaswamy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Kerala State Housing Board. In the nature of the orders proposed to be passed in this Original Petition, notice to the other respondents will stand dispensed with.

(3.) The facts and circumstances of this case discloses that this Court as per Exhibit-P3 judgment rendered on 4.1.2018 in R.P.No.745 of 2017 (arising out of O.P.(C) No.1887 of 2017) ordered that the observations made earlier by this Court in Exhibit-P2 judgment dated 28.7.2017 in O.P.(C) No.1887 of 2017 that the questions based on section 47 of the C.P.C. may not be available to the petitioner, was not essential for the disposal of that Original Petition and further that the petitioner, if the law permits, could avail the benefits under section 47 of the C.P.C. untrammelled by any of the observations of that judgment. Accordingly, this Court had also ordered in Exhibit-P3 judgment that the contentions raised by the petitioner on the basis of the provisions of the Kerala Housing Board Act, 1971 were also left open. It is also specifically ordered that the impugned Exhibit-P11 order therein shall not be implemented till 22.1.2018. Exhibit-P11 proceedings in Exhibit-P3 judgment is the order dated 13.6.2017 of the Munsiff Court, Chalakudy, in E.P.No.185 of 2016 in O.S.No.275 of 2009. The said impugned proceedings at Exhibit-P11 referred to in Exhibit-P3 has been produced at pages 44 to 51 of this Original Petition. It is now submitted by the petitioner that in furtherance of the liberty granted by this Court in Exhibit-P3 judgment, the petitioner has filed Exhibit-P4 E.A.No.12 of 2018 in E.P.No.185 of 2016 in O.S.No.275 of 2009 on 11.1.2018 before the execution court, seeking dropping of the said proceedings on account of the abovesaid contentions. To Exhibit-P4 E.A., respondents 1 and 2 (decree holders) have filed Exhibit-P5 objections. Further that the petitioner has also filed Exhibit-P6 I.A.No.11 of 2018 in the said E.P. on 11.1.2018 praying for stay of enforcement of the decree. Exhibit-P7 objections have also been filed by the decree holders as against Exhibit-P6 E.A.