Unnikrishna Pilla vs Haridasan Nair @ Haridasan
2021 Latest Caselaw 9058 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

             THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.V.ANILKUMAR

    THURSDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 27TH PHALGUNA, 1942

                          OP(C).No.379 OF 2021

IN RESPECT OF I.A.NO.1/2021 IN OS 12/2021 OF MUNSIFF COURT,HARIPAD


PETITIONERS/PLAINTIFFS:

      1      UNNIKRISHNA PILLA
             AGED 31 YEARS
             S/O RAJENDRANPILLA,
             AYILYATHU HOUSE,
             MUTHUKULAM VADAKKUM MURI,
             MUTHUKULAM VILLAGE,
             ALAPPUZHA-690 506.

      2      SRUTHI UNNIKRISHNAN
             AGED 26 YEARS
             W/O UNNIKRISHNA PILLAI,
             AYILYATHU HOUSE,
             MUTHUKULAM VADAKKUM MURI,
             MUTHUKULAM VILLAGE,
             ALAPPUZHA-690 506.

             BY ADV. SRI.SANJAY THAMPI

RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS:

      1      HARIDASAN NAIR @ HARIDASAN
             AGED 64 YEARS
             S/O NARAYANAPPANICKER,
             MANAPPALLIL HOUSE, CHEPPAD KANNINMEL MURI,
             MUTHUKULAM VILLAGE,
             ALAPPUZHA-690 506.

      2      RADHA HARIDAS
             AGED 63 YEARS
             HARIDASAN @ HARIDASAN NAIR,
             MANAPPALLIL HOUSE, CHEPPAD KANNINMEL MURI,
             MUTHUKULAM VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA-690 506.

             R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.BASANT BALAJI
             R1-2 BY ADV. SMT.P.T.MARY

     THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.03.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 OP(C).No.379 OF 2021

                                      2




                               JUDGMENT

Dated this the 18th day of March 2021

The petitioners in O.S.No.12/2021 on the files of the

Munsiff's Court, Haripad, sought for issue of a direction to the court

below for an early disposal of Ext.P4 I.A.No.01/2021 filed by them

for claiming an order of temporary injunction against the

respondents herein, within a time frame being fixed by this Court.

2. I heard the learned counsel appearing for the

respondents as well. The respondents also filed a petition for

temporary injunction in another O.S.No.324/2020 pending before

the same court and obtained an ex-parte order. The impression that

is given to this Court is that the identical issues are involved in both

suits and they may require to be jointly considered and disposed of

in the long run. It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the

respondents that, unless and until the rival claims made by the

parties for orders of injunction are taken up and considered

together, there is likelihood of prejudice being caused to the parties.

3. Having heard the submissions made on behalf of

the parties, I am of the opinion that, the Court below may take up OP(C).No.379 OF 2021

for consideration the petitions filed by either party claiming

temporary injunction together, if facts of the cases so permit and

dispose them of at an early date.

In the result, the O.P is disposed of calling upon the

court below to take up I.A.No.1/2021 in O.S.No.12/2021 and

I.A.No.1/2021 in O.S.No.324/2021 for joint consideration if the

facts of the cases so permit, and pass necessary orders in

accordance with law after hearing parties within a period of two

months, from the date of production of a certified copy of the

judgment .

Sd/-

T.V.ANILKUMAR JUDGE

SMF OP(C).No.379 OF 2021

APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF PLAINT FILED BEFORE THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, HARIPAD AS OS NO. 324/2020.FF.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DARTED 25/11/2020 PASSED BY THE JFCM-I, HARIPAD IN MC NO.191/2020.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF PLAINT FILED BEFORE THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, HARIPAD AS OS NO.12/2021 DATED 8/01/2020.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF IA NO.01/2021 FILED IN OS NO. 12/2021 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, HARIPAD.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 23/01/2021 SUBMITTED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER IN OS NO.12/2021.

//TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE