Suhas Kumar vs Hameed
2021 Latest Caselaw 9493 Ker

IA/1/2021 IN RSA 362/2020                           1/4



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

                            Monday,the 22nd day of March 2021/1st Chaithra, 1943
                                      IA.1/2021 IN RSA.362/2020 (B)

            For information purpose only
AS No.19/2016 of the SUB COURT, KANNUR
OS No.499/2009 of the ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF COURT ,KANNUR
PETITIONER/APPELLANT:
       SUHAS KUMAR,
       S/O LATE RATHI SUKUMARAN, AGED 76 YEARS,13, WELLESLY ROAD,
       KANNUR-CONTONMENT P.O.KANNUR-670001.
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1.     HAMEED,
       H/O RAMLATH, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,SUJA MAHAL, ARTILLERY ROAD,
       KANNUR-670001.

2.     RAMLATH,
       W/O HAMEED, SUJA MAHAL, ARTILLERY ROAD, KANNUR-670001.

3.      E.K.SHYAM,S/O LATE RETHI SUKUMARAN,AGED 62 YEARS
       INTELESOFT TECHNOLOGIES (P) LTD,D.R.COLLEGE.P.O,19/1-
       THAVAREKERA MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE-560 029.

         Application praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith the
High Court be pleased to issue an interim prohibitory injunction restraining the respondents
from committing any waste in the plaint schedule property in OS.No.499/2009 on the file of
Munsiff Court, Kannur from cutting and removing trees from plaint schedule property and
restraining the respondents from removing the cut trees from the plaint schedule property,
pending 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 B.KRISHNAN &
PARTHASARATHY, Advocates for the petitioner and of SRI.V.R.K. KAIMAL, Advocate
for the respondents, the court passed the following:
                 N. ANIL KUMAR, J.
    -----------------------------------------
      RSA No. 362 of 2020 & IA No. 1 of 2021
    -----------------------------------------
      Dated this the 22nd day of March, 2021


    For information purpose only
                               ORDER

Service is not complete on the 3rd respondent.

The appellant is directed to take steps to serve

notice on the 3rd respondent by speed post in

the correct address within two weeks.

IA No. 1 of 2021

This is an application filed by the

appellant/plaintiff seeking an interim

prohibitory injunction, restraining the

respondents/defendants from committing any waste

in the plaint schedule property in OS No. 499 of

2009 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Kannur

and also from cutting down the trees from the

plaint schedule property and restraining them

from removing the cut trees from the plaint

schedule property, pending disposal of the

appeal.

RSA No. 362 of 2020

..2..

2. The appellant is the plaintiff in OS No. 499 of

2009 on the file of the Munsiff's Court,

Kannur, seeking permanent prohibitory For information purpose only injunction. The plaintiff's brother,

Sri.E.K.Prakash, filed OS No. 364 of 2009 on

the file of the Munsiff's Court, Kannur for

partition of the plaint schedule property. The

appellant is the 3rd defendant in the said suit.

OS Nos. 364/2009, 344/2009 and 94/2010 were

tried together and a common judgment was

passed. The trial court dismissed the suit for

partition holding that the property is not a

thavazhy property and that it is an individual

property. The plaintiff in OS No. 364/2009

filed AS No.21/2016 before the Sub Court,

Kannur. The first appeal was dismissed

confirming the judgment and decree of the trial

court. The appellant preferred AS No. 19 of

2016 before the Sub Court, Kannur. The said

appeal along with other appeals were considered

together and the Sub Court, Kannur confirmed RSA No. 362 of 2020

..3..

the judgment and decree passed by the trial

court. Challenging the same, this RSA has been

preferred.

For information purpose only

3. The only limited prayer in this application is

to restrain the respondents/defendants from

committing any waste in the plaint schedule

property and cutting down the trees or removing

the trees from the plaint schedule property.

4. Having taken into consideration the facts and

circumstances, it is just and proper to protect

the subject matter during the pendency of this

second appeal. Hence, the respondents are

restrained from committing any waste in the

plaint schedule property and cutting down the

trees therein or removing the cut trees from

the plaint schedule property, pending disposal

of the appeal.

The IA is allowed accordingly.

Sd/-

N. ANIL KUMAR JUDGE bka/-

/true copy/ Sd/- ASSISTANT REGISTRAR