IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 14959 of 2005(E)
1. K.RAMABHADRAN, AGED 39 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. DHAMAYANTHI, AGED 65 YEARS,
... Respondent
2. SHIBU, AGED 33 YEARS,
3. PRASOBHA, AGED 39,
4. SADASIVAN, AGED 49 YEARS,
For Petitioner :SRI.D.KISHORE
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
Dated :18/08/2007
O R D E R
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J.
----------------------------------
W.P.(C) NO. 14959 of 2005
----------------------------------
Dated this the 18th day of August , 2007
JUDGMENT
Last time when the case is came up for admission, it was
submitted by the petitioner that the case be posted as and when
moved again. Today there is no representation for the petitioner. This
writ petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution
seeking to quash Ext.P7 order of the learned Munsiff dismissing an
application for temporary injunction and Ext.P8 judgment of the
learned Subordinate Judge disposing of the CMA filed against Ext.P7,
vacating the finding of the learned Munsiff regarding possession, but
at the same time, confirming Ext.P7 and declining to grant injunction.
2. The prominent ground raised is that since Ext.P3 petition for
prosecution in terms of Order 39 Rule 2A of CPC and Ext.P5 application
for mandatory injunction for restoration of the status quo ante were
pending, the learned Munsiff should not have dismissed the injunction
application. I am not very much impressed by the above grounds.
3. Having gone through Ext.P7 and P8, it is not possible to say
that the findings therein are vitiated to the extent of justifying
interference under the supervisory jurisdiction which is invoked only in
WPC No.14959/2005 2
exceptional cases. In all probabilities, the trial of the suit which was of
the year 2003 has already proceeded. I dispose of the writ petition
issuing the following directions:
If O.S. No.931/2003 is not already disposed of, the learned
Munsiff, Neyyattinkara, will try and dispose of the same in
accordance with law, without being influenced by the findings entered
in Exts.P7 and P8. Decision in the suit will be taken on the basis of the
evidence which comes on record at the time of trial. The learned
Munsiff will treat the findings in Exts.P7 and P8 as provisional findings
entered only for the purpose of the interlocutory proceedings. Suit will
be disposed of (if not already disposed of) as directed above at the
earliest and at any rate within three months of receiving a copy of
this judgment.
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,
JUDGE.
dpk
