For Information Purpose Only vs Unnikrishnan
2021 Latest Caselaw 11775 Ker

IA/1/2021 IN RSA 374/2021                           1/3



                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                                 Present:
                        THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANIL KUMAR

                            Friday,the 9th day of April 2021/19th Chaithra, 1943
                                       IA 1/2021 IN RSA/374/2021

            For information purpose only
AS No.57/2015 of the SUB COURT, OTTAPPALAM
OS No.73/2013 of the MUNSIFF COURT, OTTAPPALAM
APPLICANT/APPELLANT

UNNIKRISHNAN,51 YEARS,S/O. APPUKUTTY MOOTHAN, KUTTICHIRA
VEEDU , SREEKRISHNAPURAM POST,OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD
DISTRICT,679513

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS
1.KUNHIRAMA GUPTHAN,68 YEARS, S/O. KUTTA GUPTHAN,
PARAMBANKANDAM VEEDU, KADAMBAZHIPURAM,OTTAPALAM
TALUK,PALAKKAD DISTRICT,678633


[email protected] APPUKUTTY,63 YEARS, S/O. MANDAZHIYIL
RAMAGUPTHAN , MANDAZHIYIL VEEDU, PULAPATTA POST,
OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT,678632

         Application praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith the
High Court be pleased to restrain the Respondents from causing any damage to the Petition
schedule room and the machineries and the articles kept in the petition schedule room and
causing any obsruction to the petition schedule room in any manner and to pass an ad interim
order of injunction to that effect till the disposal of the above appeal.


         This application coming on for orders upon perusing the application and the affidavit
filed in support thereof, and upon hearing the arguments of M/S R.SREEHARI, Advocate for
the petitioner, the court passed the following
                    N.ANIL KUMAR, J.
    ---------------------------------------------------
      R.S.A.No.374 of 2021 & I.A.No.1 of 2021
    ----------------------------------------------------
        Dated this the 09th day of April, 2021
     For information purpose only
                 ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant.

2. This R.S.A. is admitted on the following

substantial questions of law:-

(i) Whether the first appellate court was justified in reversing the judgment and decree passed by the trial court overlooking the admitted status of the plaintiff as a tenant under Act 2 of 1965?

(ii) Whether the first appellate court was justified in holding that there is no cause of action for the suit totally overlooking Ext.A11 receipt and deposition of DW1 which includes that the defendants require the building for textile business after reconstruction?

Issue notice. Post after summer vacation.

R.S.A.No.374 of 2021 & I.A.No.1 of 2021

..2..

I.A.No.1 of 2021

For information purpose only Heard the learned counsel for the appellant.

The respondents 1 and 2 are restrained from forcibly

evicting the petitioner/appellant from the plaint schedule

shop room except in accordance with the due process of

law or committing waste therein for a period of three

months.

Sd/-

N.ANIL KUMAR, JUDGE

skj

/true copy/ Sd/- ASSISTANT REGISTRAR