Kerala High Court
Sreejith vs Kulamullathil Sreedharan on 21 May, 2024
Author: Kauser Edappagath
Bench: Kauser Edappagath
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MAY 2024 / 31ST VAISAKHA, 1946
OP(C) NO. 2337 OF 2021
OS NO.23 OF 2021 OF MUNSIFF COURT, VADAKARA
PETITIONERS/DEFENDANTS:
1 SREEJITH
AGED 34 YEARS, S/O. SREEDHARAN, ILLATHPOTIL HOUSE,
ERAMALA VILLAGE, ORKKATTIRI AMSOM DESOM, ORKKATTIRI
P.O., EP 7/184, VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673
106.
2 SHILPA
AGED 28 YEARS, W/O. SREEJITH, ILLATHPOTIL HOUSE,
ERAMALA VILLAGE, ORKKATTIRI AMSOM DESOM, ORKKATTIRI
P.O., EP 7/184, VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673
106.
BY ADVS. KRISHNADAS P. NAIR K.L.SREEKALA HARIDAS
P.NAIR M.A.VINOD M.RAJESH KUMAR
RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF:
KULAMULLATHIL SREEDHARAN
AGED 70 YEARS, S/O.KANNAN, ILLATHPOTIL HOUSE, ERAMALA
VILLAGE, ORKKATTIRI AMSOM DESOM, ORKKATTIRI P.O, EP
7/184, VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 106.
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.05.2024,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP(C) 2337/2021
-2-
JUDGMENT
Ext.P7 order passed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 of the
CPC is under challenge in this Original Petition.
2. The petitioners are the defendants in O.S
No.23/2021 pending on the file of Munsiff Court, Vadakara
(for, short 'the Trial Court'). The respondent is the plaintiff.
The petitioners are son and daughter in law of the
respondent.
3. The dispute is with respect to the plaint schedule
house belonging to the plaintiff. Ext.P1 is the plaint. The
suit was instituted for a permanent prohibitory injunction,
restraining the defendants from trespassing into the plaint
schedule property, and also for a mandatory injunction
directing the defendants to demolish unauthorised
construction made to the plaint schedule house. Along with
OP(C) 2337/2021
the plaint, the plaintiff filed an interim injunction
application as Ext.P2. The Trial Court, after hearing both
sides, passed Ext.P4 order, whereby, the defendants were
restrained by an order of temporary injunction from
dispossessing the plaintiff from the plaint schedule house.
The prayer for restraining the defendants from trespassing
into the plaint schedule house was not granted. Dissatisfied
with the same, the plaintiff approached Sub Court, Vadakara
(for short, Appellate Court') by filing CMA 2/2021. In CMA
2/2021, the plaintiff filed an interim injunction application
as I.A 2/2021. The appellate Court, after hearing both
sides, allowed I.A No.2/2021 and the following order has
been passed:
"14. Point No.(ii):- In view of the finding on point No.(i). this
petition is allowed as follows:-
i) Respondents are permitted to use the newly built room, bath room
and latrine constructed in the property of petitioner's wife.
OP(C) 2337/2021
ii) If the entrance to the said additional room is through the main
entrance of plaint schedule house, respondents are at liberty to
provide a door to the newly built room from the property of
petitioner's wife with her permission.
iii) If the construction of such a door is not possible, respondents
shall remove themselves from the plaint schedule house within
one month from today if an alternate accommodation for the 2 nd
petitioner and her child could be arranged by the 1 st respondent
or the petitioner.
iv) No order as to costs."
It is challenging the said order, the defendants have come
before this Court.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the
petitioners. There is no appearance for the respondent.
5. I.A No.2/2021 was disposed of as early as in
29.03.2021. It is submitted that the CMA 2/2021 itself has
been disposed of. Hence, the challenge against the
impugned order has practically become infructuous. The suit
has been pending since 2021. The learned counsel for the
petitioners submits that there may be a direction to the
OP(C) 2337/2021
Trial Court to dispose of the suit itself. Hence, the Trial
Court is directed to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as
possible. The parties shall maintain the status-quo till the
disposal of the suit.
The Original Petition is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
JUDGE
JS
OP(C) 2337/2021
APPENDIX OF OP(C) 2337/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE OS NO.23/2021 OF MUNSIFF
COURT, VATAKARA.
Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER IN IA NO.2/2021 IN OS
NO.23/2021 OF MUNSIFF COURT, VATAKARA.
Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT IN OS
NO.23/2021 OF MUNSIFF COURT, VATAKARA.
Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN IA NO.2/2021 IN OS
NO.23/2021 OF MUNSIFF COURT, VATAKARA DATED
19.2.2021.
Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE IA NO.2/2021 IN CMA NO.2/2021
BEFORE THE SUB COURT, VATAKARA.
Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER IA NO.2/2021 IN CMA
NO.2/21 BEFORE THE SUB COURT, VATAKARA.
Exhibit P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN IA NO.2/2021 IN CMA
NO.2/21 BEFORE THE SUB COURT, VATAKARA.
