(1.) THE 1st respondent has obtained Ext. P5 order dated 15-11-2008 from the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kodungallur under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic violence Act, 2005 in respect of a two storied building of which petitioner claims to be the tenant in possession under the 2nd respondent herein. Even though the petitioner sought for his impleadment in the proceeding before the learned Magistrate, that was not allowed by the learned Magistrate. Aggrieved by ext. P5 order, petitioner filed Ext. P8 appeal (Crl. A. No. 278/2009)before the Court of Sessions, Thrissur under section 29 of the said Act. The said appeal is pending. Along with the appeal, petitioner claims to have filed Ext. P9 petition as C. M. P. No. 1892/2009 for stay of operation of Ext. P5 order. His grievance is that Ext. P9 petition for stay has not been taken up by the learned Sessions Judge and while so, the petitioner is sought to be dispossessed in pursuance of Ext. P5 order. In the fitness of things it is only just and proper that the sessions Court, Thrissur is directed to hear and dispose of ext. P8 appeal as expeditiously as possible or at any rate, within three months of the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, provided the said appeal is ripe for hearing. In case the learned sessions Judge is not able to hear and dispose of the appeal, as aforesaid, he shall take up the petition C. M. P. 1892/2009 (Ext. P9) for consideration and pass appropriate orders. No other relief can be granted in this petition, since the proceedings under the Protection of Domestic Violence Act, 2005 have to be concluded expeditiously. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of.