IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 30607 of 2006(R)
1. PANKAJAKSHY, D/O.MADHAVI AMMA,
... Petitioner
2. PUSHPAVATHY, D/O.MADHAVI AMMA,
Vs
1. SMT.KRISHAJA, W/O.RAVEENDRAN,
... Respondent
2. RAVEENDRAN, H/O.KRISHNAJA, DO. DO.
For Petitioner :SRI.S.EASWARAN
For Respondent :SRI.PHILIP MATHEW
The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
Dated :09/08/2007
O R D E R
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J.
-------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 30607 OF 2006
AND
FAO No. 238 of 2007
-----------------------------------
Dated this the 9th day of August, 2007
JUDGMENT
Under challenge in WPC 30607 of 2006 is Ext.P7 interim order
passed by the lower appellate court in CMA No.24 of 2006 staying the
operation of an order of temporary injunction which had been passed by
the trial court. The CMA filed by the respondent before the lower
appellate court was directed against Ext.P4 order of injunction passed in
favour of the petitioner. The effect of Ext.P7 was to render Ext.P4
injunction order inoperative. On hearing the initial submissions of
counsel on 17.07.07, CMA No.24/ of 2006 was ordered to be withdrawn
from the files of the Sub Court to this Court. Accordingly, on receipt of
the records, the CMA was registered with this court as FAO No.238 of
2007.
2. I have heard counsel on either sides. It is seen that on
admitting the Writ Petition this Court directed both sides to maintain
status quo and restrained both sides from committing any act of waste
on the property in question. Those directions are even now in currency.
3. Having regard to the submissions addressed before me by
counsel, I am of the view that it is not necessary that this Court
examines the merits of the rival contentions. It would suffice if the
WPC No.30607 of 2006
2
parties continue to maintain status quo and are restrained from
committing any acts of waste on the property. Accordingly, the Writ
Petition and the FAO are disposed of issuing the following directions:
Ext.P4 order of injunction and Ext.P7 order of stay produced in
the Writ Petition will stand substituted by an order directing both sides to
maintain status quo in respect of the suit property as obtaining on the
date of institution of the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal before the lower
appellate court. Similarly, both sides are restrained from committing any
acts of waste on the property till such time as the suit is disposed of.
The learned Munsiff is directed to dispose of the suit on the basis of the
evidence which comes on record at trial without being influenced by
anything that has been stated in Exts.P4 or P7 and also the interim
order of this Court dt.20.11.06. The learned Munsiff will dispose of the
suit at the earliest and at any rate within a period of six months of
receiving copy of this common judgment.
It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion
touching the merits of the rival contentions.
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE
btt
WPC No.30607 of 2006
3
