IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH MARCH 2008 / 6TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 10058 of 2008(V) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED / / IN IA 1838/2007 IN OS.106/2007 of MUNI-MAGI COURT, DEVICOLAM .................... PETITIONER: ------------ 1. K.V.MURALEEDHARAN,AGED 40 YEARS, S/O. K.V.VELAYUDHAN, AISWARYA, SUVARNA ROAD ELEMAKKARA KARA, EDAPPALLY SOUTH VILLAGE KANAYANNOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 2. ABDULMANAF P.B., AGED 29 YEARS, S/O. P.M.BAVA, PALAKAPILLI HOUSE, ELEMAKKARA KARA, EDAPPALLY SOUTH VILLAGE KANAYANNOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 3. MUHAMMAD SAGEER,AGED 42 YEARS S/O.ABDUL RAHMAN MOOPAN, FEDERAL APARTMENTS THAIKATTUKARA P.O.,ALUVA VILLAGE, ALUVA TALUK. 4. S.A. SHARAFUDDEN, AGED 45 YEARS S/O. ABDUL AZEEZ, SIRANGAN HOUSE, DESABHIMANI ROAD, KALOOR P.O., ELAMKULAM VILLAGE KANAYANNOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 5. S.I.SAINALABEED, AGED 41 YEARS S/O. ISMAIL SIRANGAN HOUSE, DESEBHIMANY ROAD KALOOR P.O., ELAMKULAM VILLAGE,KANANNOOR TALUK ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 6. K.A.ABDUL BASID,AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL AZEEZ,KOLLIYIL HOUSE, KALOOR P.O., ELAMKULAM VILLAGE, KANAYANNOOR TALUK,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ WP(C) No. 10058/2008 RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. SASIDHARAN ALIAS SASI AGED 52 YEARS,S/O.SREEDHARAN, RESIDING AT KAVALAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, KANTHALLOOR KARA, KANTHALLOOR VILLAGE, DEVIKULAM TALUK. 2. SREEDHARAN,S/O. KELAN, AGED 71 YEARS KAVALAMPARAMBIL HOUSE KANTHALLOOR KARA, KANTHALLOOR VILLAGE. 3. SUDHEER,S/O.SREEDHARAN,AGED 31 YEARS KAVALAMPARAMBIL HOUSE KANTHALLOOR KARA, KANTHALLOOR VILLAGE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J ===================== W.P.(C) No.10058 OF 2008 ===================== Dated this the 26th day of March 2008 JUDGMENT This writ petition is preferred to set aside Exts.P6 and P7 orders and review the order making Ext.P3 order absolute. The trial court granted an order of temporary injunction ex parte and later after appearance of the parties confirmed it thereby making the injunction order absolute. Petitioners herein moved an application for review of that order and the court below refused to entertain the review application and dismissed the same. I feel the proper remedy for the party is to challenge the order passed by the learned Munsiff in appeal and while such an appeal is preferred, since the application for review has been filed and it has consumed time, the appellate court shall consider the delay caused in filing the appeal sympathetically, then entertain the appeal and pass appropriate orders after hearing both sides. With this observation the writ petition is dismissed. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE Cdp/- -:2:-