Koovalapatta Zainaba vs Shabin
2021 Latest Caselaw 23851 Ker

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                  PRESENT
                     THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
       Saturday, the 4th day of December 2021 / 13th Agrahayana, 1943

                          OP(C) NO. 1913 OF 2021


     EP 179/2020 IN OS 125/2017 OF I ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, KOZHIKODE.

PETITIONERS/ JUDGMENT DEBTORS IN E.P NO. 179/2020:

  1. KOOVALAPATTA ZAINABA, AGED 62 YEARS, W/O. MUHAMMED MUSLIAR, P.O.
     VELIMANNA,        OMASSERY (VIA), NOOLADUMMAL HOUSE, RAROTH VILLAGE,
     VELIMANNA DESOM, THAMARASSERY TALUK, PIN - 673 582.



      And another.

RESPONDENT/ DECREE HOLDER IN E.P NO. 179/2020:

     SHABIN, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O. ASHRAF M. P., MADATHI PARAMBIL, PUTHUR
     VILLAGE, PUTHUR DESOM, THAMARASSERY TALUK, KOZHIKODE - 673 104.


     OP (Civil) praying inter alia that in the circumstances stated in
the affidavit filed along with the OP(C) the High Court be pleased to stay
all further proceedings in EP No. 179/2020 on the file of the 1st
Additional Sub Court, Kozhikode, pending disposal of this Original
Petition (Civil) in the interest of justice.


     This petition again coming on for admission upon perusing the
petition and the affidavit filed in support of OP(C) and this court's
order dated 05-11-2021 and upon hearing the arguments of Sri.
U.JAYAKRISHNAN, Advocate for the petitioners and of M/S K.M.FIROZ &
M.SHAJNA, Advocates for the respondent, the court passed the following:


                                                                        [PTO]
                                 V.G.ARUN, J.
                        ============================
                          O.P.(C) No.1913 of 2021
                         ---------------------------
             Dated this the 04th day of December, 2021

                                     ORDER

Learned Counsel for the respondents raises

strong objection against the continuance of the

interim order and submits that under cover of the

interim order, the respondent has trespassed into the

decree schedule property. The submission is refuted

by the learned Counsel for the petitioner reiterating

his contention that only symbolic delivery was

effected.

Learned Counsel for the respondent submits that

an affidavit narrating the facts and events after

the interim order is being filed.

Post on 10.12.2021.

Interim order is extended till then.

Affidavit, if any, to be filed in the meanwhile.

Sd/-

V.G.ARUN JUDGE Scl/04.12.2021

04-12-2021 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar