Kerala High Court
Unnikrishnan Nair vs Sukumaran Nair on 13 October, 2025
2025:KER:75861
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN
MONDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 / 21ST ASWINA, 1947
OP(C) NO. 2486 OF 2025
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 24.07.2018 IN OS NO.131 OF 2018 OF
MUNSIFF COURT, CHANGANACHERRY ARISING OUT OF AS NO.96 OF 2025 OF
DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT/RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY,
KOTTAYAM
PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS/JUDGMENT DEBTORS:
1 UNNIKRISHNAN NAIR
AGED 69 YEARS
S/O. KRISHNAN NAIR, RESIDING AT KAKKATTU HOUSE,
PANACHIKKAVU PO., CHANGANACHERRY VILLAGE,
CHANGANACHERRY TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 686102
2 RATHEESH
AGED 33 YEARS
S/O. UNNIKRISHNAN NAIR, RESIDING AT KAKKATTU HOUSE,
PANACHIKKAVU PO., CHANGANACHERRY VILLAGE,
CHANGANACHERRY TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 686102
BY ADV SRI.S.JAYAKRISHNAN
RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFFS/DECREE HOLDERS:
1 SUKUMARAN NAIR
AGED 88 YEARS
S/O. KRISHNAN NAIR, RESIDING AT KAKKATTU HOUSE,
PERUNNA WEST KARA, CHANGANACHERRY VILLAGE,
CHANGANACHERRY TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 686102
2 ARCHANA
OP(C) NO. 2486 OF 2025 2
2025:KER:75861
AGED 43 YEARS
D/O. SUKUMARAN NAIR, RESIDING AT KAKKATTU HOUSE,
PERUNNA WEST KARA, CHANGANACHERRY VILLAGE,
CHANGANACHERRY TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 686102
3 ANJANA
AGED 38 YEARS
D/O. SUKUMARAN NAIR, RESIDING AT KAKKATTU HOUSE,
PERUNNA WEST KARA, CHANGANACHERRY VILLAGE,
CHANGANACHERRY TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 686102
4 AJITH
AGED 48 YEARS
S/O. SUKUMARAN NAIR, RESIDING AT KAKKATTU HOUSE,
PERUNNA WEST KARA, CHANGANACHERRY VILLAGE,
CHANGANACHERRY TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 686102
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
13.10.2025,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
OP(C) NO. 2486 OF 2025 3
2025:KER:75861
JUDGMENT
(Dated this the 13th day of October, 2025)
This petition is filed by the petitioners/defendants for issuing
direction to the District Court, Kottayam, to consider Exts.P5 and
P6 interlocutory applications, filed for condoning the delay in filing
the appeal and for granting stay of the decree obtained against the
petitioners within a time bound manner.
2. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, issue
notice to the respondents/plaintiffs and call for a report from the
concerned court is dispensed with.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners/defendants.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
respondents obtained the decree against the petitioners in
O.S.No.131 of 2018, restraining the petitioners from fetching the
water and reclaiming the well situated in the property of the
respondents/plaintiffs. Against the decree, the petitioners had
already approached the District Court by filing an appeal suit in
A.S.No.96 of 2025. Along with the appeal suit, the petitioners also
filed interlocutory applications for condoning the delay under
Section 5 of the Limitation Act and also for staying the execution
2025:KER:75861
and operation of the decree by filing an application under Order XLI
Rule 5 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
5. Notice have been served on the respondents/plaintiffs and
District Court called the objections from the plaintiffs and posted
the matter by calling the objections without considering the
urgency of the petitioners for staying the execution of the decree
and condoning the delay. Meanwhile, the respondents/plaintiffs
proceeded with the Execution Petition in EP No.19/2025.
Therefore, prayed for issuing direction and meanwhile deferring the
proceedings in execution.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances, and the
interlocutory applications filed along with the the appeal though
petitioners can also file a petition before the same court which
passes decree for setting aside the exparte decree by filing
application under Order IX Rule 13 of Code of Civil Procedure. But
the petitioners chosen to file a first appeal before the District Court,
which is numbered as A.S No.96 of 2025 and also filed applications
for condoning the delay as well as staying the operation of the
decree. Those IA's are pending even though the respondents
already appeared and the matter was adjourned, meanwhile the
2025:KER:75861
respondents trying to execute the decree. Therefore, it is necessary
to issue directions.
7. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with a direction to
the District Court, Kottayam, to hear and dispose both the
interlocutory applications for condoning the delay as well as staying
the execution petition on the decree, within two months from the
date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Till the disposal of those interlocutory applications, the
execution proceedings, EP No.9/2025 filed by the
respondents/plaintiffs in O.S. No.131/2018 pending on the file of
the Munsif'f's Court, Changnacherry, is hereby deferred.
Sd/-
K. NATARAJAN
JUDGE
MSA
2025:KER:75861
APPENDIX OF OP(C) 2486/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 . TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 24.07.2018
IN O.S. NO.131/2018 OF THE MUNSIFF'S
COURT, CHANGANACHERRY
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF EXECUTION PETITION E.P. NO.
9/2025 IN O.S. NO.131/2018 FILED BY THE
RESPONDENTS BEFORE THE MUNSIFF'S COURT,
CHANGANACHERRY
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE
PETITIONERS TO E.P. NO. 9/2025 IN O.S.
NO.131/2018 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF'S COURT,
CHANGANACHERRY
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED
31.07.2025 IN AS NO. 96/2025 FILED BY
THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE DISTRICT
COURT, KOTTAYAM
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF I.A. NO. 1/2025 IN AS NO.
96/2025 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE
THE DISTRICT COURT, KOTTAYAM FOR
CONDONATION OF DELAY
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF I.A. NO. 2/2025 IN AS NO.
96/2025 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE
THE DISTRICT COURT, KOTTAYAM FOR STAY OF
EXECUTION
