A litigation which started in 1970's, culminating in ultimate delivery of the property to the petitioner, the petitioner is not able to enjoy the fruits of the decree because he been kept at bay by the dilatory tactics adopted by the judgment debtors. Ext.P4 petition filed by one of the judgment debtors challenging the delivery of the property was for a declaration that delivery effected is not proper.
2. The petitioner points out that objection to that petition was filed immediately on receipt of the notice and the matter is being simply adjourned from time to time without recording delivery. The dates of postings also made mention of in the petition. The petitioner prays that there may be a direction to the court below to take up the matter and dispose of it as expeditiously as possible, so that a quietus can be given to the issue finally.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner points out that the matter now stands posted to 01-01-2015.
O.P.(C) No.2922 of 2014 2
4. The story is indeed sad and is a typical instance where one of the parties manages to drag on the matter for years and years under one pretext or another. It is only proper for this court to accede to the request made by the petitioner.
5. In the light of the order that is proposed to be passed, notice to the respondent is unnecessary.
6. This original petition is disposed of with a direction to the Munsiff's Court, Perinthalmanna to take up E.A. No.283/2014 in E.P. No.71 of 2013, which is produced as Ext.P4 to this petition, on 01-01-2015 itself and dispose of it on merits after hearing both sides, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from 01-01-2015.
Sd/-
P. BHAVADASAN, JUDGE.
//true copy// St/-
P.S. To Judge