IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 7976 of 2007(Y)
1. P.J.PAULOSE, S/O.JOSEPH, AGED 51 YEARS,
... Petitioner
2. CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST, REPRESENTED
3. CARAMEL ENGINEERING COLLEGE
Vs
1. GRACY BABU THOMAS,
... Respondent
2. JOSE THOMAS, S/O.THOMAS AGED 49 YEARS,
3. FRUDDY BABU THOMAS,
4. JUDY BABU THOMAS,
5. RIJO THOMAS JOSE,
6. REENA JOSE THOMAS,
7. ANNA JOSE @ RAJI JOSE D/O.REENA JOSE,
8. LISSY POULOSE, W/O.P.J.PAULOSE,
9. ROSHINI PAUL JOSEPH, D/O.LISSY PAULOSE,
10. ROHINI PAUL JOSEPH D/O.LISSY PAULOSE,
11. INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK, INDU INTERNATIONAL
For Petitioner :SRI.BABY ISSAC ILLICKAL
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.P.BALACHANDRAN
Dated :09/03/2007
O R D E R
K.P.BALACHANDRAN, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C)NO.7976 OF 2007
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 9th day of March 2007
JUDGMENT
The plaintiffs in O.S.248/06 on the file of Sub Court,
Pathanamthitta are the petitioners. Along with the suit they filed
I.A.1622/2006 for an interim injunction. The court below
ordered notice and posted the case to 27.1.2007. It is submitted
that a petition to advance the hearing of the suit and the
injunction petition was filed on 15.12.2006 and that was
dismissed on 1.1.2007. Obviously when notice was ordered on
injunction petition and the suit and the injunction petition are
posted to 27.1.2007, the posting could not have been advanced.
But the grievance of the petitioner is that on 27.1.2007 all
counter petitioners entered appearance and filed counter but
hearing of the injunction application was adjourned to 13.3.2007
along with the suit and though the petitioners moved I.A.137/07
on 9.2.2007 to advance the hearing of the injunction application
that I.A. also was dismissed on 9.2.2007.
2. If, as is submitted by counsel for the petitioners, the
respondents had entered appearance and filed counter there is
W.P.(C)NO.7976 OF 2007
2
no justification for the court below in refusing to advance
hearing and have the injunction matter heard when it is
submitted that the matter is urgent. The position would be
different, if the submission made is not true to facts.
3. In the result, I direct the court below to advance hearing
of I.A.1622/06 and to pass appropriate orders thereon within
three weeks from the date on which a copy of this judgment is
received by him provided the counter petitioners in the said I.A.
have entered appearance and filed counter as is submitted by
the counsel for the petitioners. The petitioners are at liberty to
produce a copy of this judgment before the Sub Judge,
Pathanamthitta to enable him to comply with the above
directions at the earliest.
This writ petition is disposed of with the above direction.
K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JUDGE
jes