IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 1ST SEPTEMBER 2011 / 10TH BHADRA 1933 OP(C).NO. 2886 OF 2011(O) --------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED IN IA.2651/2011 IN OS.386/2011 OF MUNSIFF COURT, MUVATTUPUZHA .................... PETITIONER: -------------------- K.N. SOMASEKHARAN, S/O. KRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 58 YEARS, SURYASOMA HOUSE, IRAMALLOOR VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM TAALUK, KOTHAMANGALAM. BY ADV. SRI.TOM K.THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- WILSON, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.VARGHESE, PUTHNPURACKAL HOUSE, KUTHUKUZHI KARA, KUTHUKUZHY P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM VILLAGE, ERNAKUALM DISTRICT, PIN – 686 691. THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: O.P(C) NO.2886 OF 2011 APPENDIX --------------- PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: ---------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.NO.386 OF 2011 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, MUVATTUPUZHA. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF I.A. NO.2651 OF 2011 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, MUVATTUPUZHA. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ON I.A. NO.2651 OF 2011 DATED 20.08.2011. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT IN I.A. NO.2651 OF 2011 DATED 24.08.2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: ----------------------------------- NIL TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== O.P(C) No.2886 of 2011 ==================================== Dated this the 01st day of September, 2011 J U D G M E N T First defendant in O.S. No.386 of 2011 of the court of learned Munsiff, Muvattupuzha is the petitioner before me. That is a suit filed by the respondent for a decree for prohibitory injunction against petitioner and his wife continuing construction works in the plaint schedule. According to the petitioner, he had entrusted construction of the building in plaint A schedule with the respondent and that contract was later terminated. Respondent moved Ext.P2, application (I.A. No.2651 of 2011) for injunction to restrain petitioner and his wife from causing construction to be made by anybody other than the respondent. Learned Munsiff passed Ext.P3, interim order. Petitioner filed Ext.P4, objection. Learned counsel submits that application was heard on 25.08.2011, posted the same on 29.08.2011 for orders and now it is posted on 07.09.2011. In the meantime matter was referred to the Adalath for settlement. According to the learned counsel, there is no possibility of a settlement. Grievance of petitioner is O.P(C) No.2886 of 2011 -: 2 :- that on account of the interim order the entire construction work in plaint A schedule is stalled and petitioner is suffering loss everyday. In that circumstance it is prayed that learned Munsiff may be directed to dispose of Ext.P2, application as early as possible. 2. As the learned counsel submitted, the matter is coming up for settlement before the Adalath on 02.09.2011. I think, parties must be given opportunity to attend the settlement on that day and if settlement does not happen, then, it is the responsibility of learned Munsiff to dispose of Ext.P2, application for injunction without wasting time as provided under law, having regard to the grievance of petitioner. Resultantly, the Original Petition is disposed of directing learned Munsiff to dispose of Ext.P2, application for temporary injunction as early as possible having regard to the grievance of petitioner in case no settlement is reached in the Adalath. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv