Kerala High Court
Sheeba vs Nassar on 20 December, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 29TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944
OP(C) NO. 2523 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 09.12.2022 IN I.A.NO.8/2022 IN OS 55/2022
OF MUNSIFF MAGISTRATE COURT, KOTHAMANGALAM
PETITIONER/ PETITIONER/ DEFENDANT:
SHEEBA,
AGED 40 YEARS,
W/O ABDUL SATHAR,
INCHAKKUDIYIL HOUSE,
ERAMALLOOR KARA,
ERAMALLOOR VILLAGE,
KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 686691
BY ADVS. S.RENJITH
P.K.SREEVALSAKRISHNAN
K.R.PRATHISH
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF:
NASSAR,
AGED 54 YEARS,
S/O ABDUL RAHMAN,
INCHAKKUDIYIL HOUSE,
ERAMALLOOR KARA,
ERAMALLOOR VILLAGE,
KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 686691
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.12.2022,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
O.P.(C)No.2523/2022
-:2:-
Dated this the 20th day of December,2022
JUDGMENT
Aggrieved by Exts P4, P9 and P10 orders passed in
I.A.Nos.4,8 & 9/2022, respectively, in O.S.No.55/2022
by the Court of the Munsiff, Kothamangalam, the
defendant has filed the original petition. The
respondent is the plaintiff.
2. The principal grievance of the petitioner is
that, even though she had appeared in the suit and
sought time to file her counter statement to
I.A.No.4/2022, an application for temporary injunction,
the court below, by the impugned Ext P4 order, has
allowed the application by restraining the petitioner
from entering into the plaint 'B' schedule property and
causing any destruction to the crops. Aggrieved by
Ext P4, the petitioner filed I.A.No.8/2022, for review of
Ext P4 order. The court below, by Ext P9 order,
O.P.(C)No.2523/2022
dismissed I.A.No.8/2022 holding that there is no error
apparent on the face of the record. Consequentially,
the court below, by Ext P10 order made Ext P4 order
absolute.
3. Heard; Sri. S. Renjith, the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner.
4. On a perusal of Exts P4 and P10 orders, it is
evident that the orders are passed under Order 39
Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure,1908(in short,
'Code').
5. An order passed under Order 39 Rule 1 of the
Code is appealable under Order 43 Rule 1(r) of the
Code.
6. In the light of the alternative statutory
remedy provided under the Code, I am not inclined to
entertain the original petition under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India.
O.P.(C)No.2523/2022
In the result, without prejudice to the right of the
petitioner to work out her remedies in accordance with
law, the original petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS,JUDGE
DST/20.12.22 //True copy/
P.A.To Judge
O.P.(C)No.2523/2022
APPENDIX
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S NO. 55 OF
2022 OF MUNSIFF COURT, KOTHAMANGALAM
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE I.A. NO. 04 OF 2022 IN O.S
NO. 55 OF 2022 OF MUNSIFF COURT,
KOTHAMANGALAM
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT IN O.S
NO. 55 OF 2022 OF MUNSIFF COURT,
KOTHAMANGALAM
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03.11.2022 IN
I.A. NO. 04 OF 2022 IN O.S NO. 55 OF 2022
OF MUNSIFF COURT, KOTHAMANGALAM
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER IN I.A. NO. 4 OF
2022 IN O.S NO. 55 OF 2022 OF MUNSIFF
COURT, KOTHAMANGALAM FILED BY THE
PETITIONER DATED 04.11.2022
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF I.A NO. 8 OF 2022 IN O.S NO.
55 OF 2022 OF MUNSIFF COURT, KOTHAMANGALAM
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF I.A NO. 9 OF 2022 IN O.S NO.
55 OF 2022 OF MUNSIFF COURT, KOTHAMANGALAM
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER IN I.A. NO. 8 OF
2022 IN O.S NO. 55 OF 2022 OF MUNSIFF
COURT, KOTHAMANGALAM
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A. NO. 8 OF
2022 IN O.S NO. 55 OF 2022 OF MUNSIFF
COURT, KOTHAMANGALAM DATED 09.12.2022
EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A. NO. 9 OF
2022 IN O.S NO. 55 OF 2022 OF MUNSIFF
COURT, KOTHAMANGALAM DATED 09.12.2022
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL
