The legal principle established is that pending appeals concerning land titles must be resolved before continuing civil litigation regarding the same property.

J U D G M E N T

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

“i) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 1st respondent to consider and decide on Exhibits P18 to P22 within a time frame fixed by this Honourable Court. ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction compelling the Munsiff's Court, Ernakulam to keep all further proceedings in O.S.No.No.306/2006 and O.S.No.294/2006 (Exts.P1 and P2) pending before it in abeyance, till the disposal of Exhibits P18 to P22”.

2. The first petitioner is a temple which is stated to be under the management of the second petitioner. The case of the petitioners is that some properties belonging to the temple which come under Service Inam Land, were attended to by some persons who did menial jobs in the temple. The lands were assigned in favour of such persons without notice to the temple, and later, the assignees conveyed the properties in favour of the respondents 2 to 8 in the present petition. There is interdiction under the law in the transfer of service inam land. So much so, transfers effected by those who were in possession and also later, after obtaining pattayam from the Tribunal, cannot be recognized under law, is the further case of the petitioners. The temple and its authorities came to know of the grant of pattayam and also transfers effected only when the respondents 2 to 8 instituted suits claiming exclusive possession over the temple lands. The temple has filed another suit against them for a decree of perpetual prohibitory injunction to restrain them from trespassing upon its land on knowing that pattayams had been issued over the land in favour of their transferors. Petitioners also preferred an appeal before the District Collector challenging the grant of pattayam, and such appeals are pending. Ext.P18 to P22 are the copies of the memorandum of appeals preferred against granting of pattas in respect of the above lands. In the writ petition, petitioners seek for keeping in abeyance the further proceedings in the suits filed by respondents 2 to 8 and also the petitioners, till a decision is taken in the appeals, Ext.P18 to P22, by the District Collector, the appellate authority.

3. Notice being given, respondents 2 to 8 have entered appearance. Learned Government Pleader has taken notice for the first respondent. I heard the counsel for both sides.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents 2 to 8 submitted that the appellate authority had already issued notice to the parties for hearing the appeals, and he has no objections in passing an order for keeping in abeyance further proceedings of the two suits till the appeals are disposed of.

5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances presented and the submissions made, I find a speedy disposal of the appeals, Exts.P18 to P22, by the appellate authority is essential to a give a quietus to the whole issue. The decision thereof may have its bearing in the pending two suits for adjudication before the civil court. The learned Principal Munsiff is directed to not list the cases for trial, and if listed to remove them, for a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment so as to await the decision of the appellate authority in Exts.P18 to P22 appeals. The District Collector, Ernakulam, the appellate authority, is directed to hear and dispose of Exts.P18 to P22 appeals, as expeditiously as possible, but after affording reasonable opportunity to both sides to present their respective case, within a span of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Learned Government Pleader shall take necessary steps to instruct the District Collector to comply with the directions of this Court. The writ petition is closed. Hand over a copy to the counsel on both sides on usual terms.

S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE.

bkn/-