Kerala High Court
Lilly Gomez vs Sheela on 10 April, 2019
Author: Sunil Thomas
Bench: Sunil Thomas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 / 20TH CHAITHRA,
1941
OP(C).No. 920 of 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN AS 25/2014 of PRINCIPAL SUB
COURT,ATTINGAL
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OS 438/2012 of MUNSIFF
COURT,ATTINGAL
PETITIONER/S:
1 LILLY GOMEZ,AGED 96 YEARS
D/O. GEORGE GOMAZ, FATHIMA MANDIRAM
(POZHIKKODU BUNGLOW), VADAKKERARYATHURUTHIL,
CHIRYINKEEZH DESOM, SARKARA VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 304.
2 SUMESH, AGED 41 YEARS
S/O. ISAC, T.C. NO. 6/1775A, KIZHAKKE THAYYIL
HOUSE, PTP NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695
038, FROM FATHIMA MANDIRAM, SARKARA VILLAGE.
BY ADVS.
SRI.ANEESH JAMES
SMT.M.D.BEENA
SRI.JIJO THOMAS
RESPONDENT/S:
SHEELA, AGED 61 YEARS
S/O. DALLY AMMA, CHAITHANYA, URUKKUMPUZHA
DESOM, MURUKKUMPUZHA VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 032, FROM FATHIMA
MANDIRAM, SARKARA VILLAGE.
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
10.04.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
-2-
O.P.(C). No. 920 of 2019
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court for a direction to the Sub-Court, Attingal to take up and dispose of AS No. 25 of 2014 pending before that Court. Pursuant to a direction issued from this Court, the learned Sub Judge, by his communication dated 03.04.2019 has informed that there is already a direction from the High Court to dispose of 20+ year old cases and 5+ year old cases at the earliest by adjourning on a day-to-day basis. It was stated that the number of cases pending before that Court, which is more than five years old is 1,202. Total pendency is 3282. In spite of this constraints of work, the learned Sub Judge has undertaken to dispose of the matter within ten months' time. Definitely, though this AS is pretty old of the year 2014, the Court below cannot be found fault with for the delay that has already occurred.
2. Having considered the limited prayer sought by the petitioner and the relief that is proposed to be granted, I feel that notice to the respondent can be dispensed with, since, any direction for an early disposal can only enure to the benefit of both sides.
3. However, having considered the offer made by the -3- O.P.(C). No. 920 of 2019 learned Sub Judge, which is considering the statistics of the case pending there, is justifiable, I am inclined to dispose of the OP itself with a direction to the Court below to take up and dispose of the appeal itself, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of ten months from the date of re-opening, after the mid- summer holidays.
Sd/-
SUNIL THOMAS JUDGE das APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL IN A.S. NO. 25 OF 2014 ON THE FILE OF THE SUB COURT,ATTINGAL.
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 21.06.2014 IN O.S.NO. 438 OF 2012 OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, ATTINGAL.