IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 15352 of 2008(C)
1. T.S.LALIT
... Petitioner
Vs
1. K.MANORAMA
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.LIJI.J.VADAKEDOM
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
Dated :23/05/2008
O R D E R
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.
...........................................
WP(C).No.15352 OF 2008
............................................
DATED THIS THE 23rd DAY OF MAY, 2008
JUDGMENT
Petitioner is the defendant in O.S.46 of 2008 on the file of
Sub Court, Pala. I.A.63 of 2008 was filed in the suit under Order
XXXIX Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure for an order of
temporary injunction. After the courts closed for summer
vacation, respondent/plaintiff moved I.A.596 of 2008 before
District Judge, being the vacation court, to advance the hearing
in I.A.63 of 2008 on the file of Sub Court, Pala, contending that
urgent orders are required. Under Ext.P4 order, learned District
Judge advanced the case as sought for. Subsequently, under
Ext.P8 order, learned Additional District Judge, who was in
charge of the vacation court on 16.5.2008, passed Ext.P8 interim
order recording a prima facie case restraining petitioner herein
from trespassing into the property. Learned Additional District
Judge directed the parties to appear before trial court on
24.5.2008 for final hearing. Ext.P4 and P8 orders are challenged
in this petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India.
2. The argument of learned counsel appearing for
petitioner is that there was absolutely no valid reason to take up
WP(C)15352/2008 2
the matter before the vacation court and therefore Ext.P4 order
is to be quashed. Learned counsel also argued that an interim
order as granted under Ext.P8 should not have been granted
especially when that petition was pending before the Sub Court,
prior to the closing of courts.
3. Though there is force in the submission of the learned
counsel, in view of Ext.P8 order, I do not find it necessary in the
interest of justice to interfere especially when final order is yet
to be passed. Suffice to say that operation of Ext.P8 order is
limited to 24.5.2008 and learned Sub Judge is to pass final order
in I.A.63 of 2008 on 24.5.2008 or immediately without further
delay as the case is directed to be posted before the Sub Judge to
that day. It is made clear that if it is not possible for the learned
Sub Judge to pass final order on 24.5.2008, he has to pass
appropriate order on that day, untrammelled by any observations
in Ext.P8 order.
Writ petition is disposed as above.
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE
lgk/-