IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI THURSDAY, THE 9TH DECEMBER 2010 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 FAO.No. 254 of 2010 ----------------------------- -------- AGAINST THE COMMON ORDER IN IA.NOS.4115/09 & 4116/09 DATED 24.6.2010 IN O.S.NO.979 OF 2009 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. SUB COURT, KOLLAM. .................... APPELLANT/APPLICANT/PLAINTIFF ---------------------------------------------------- SHANIL.S, AGED 40 YEARS, SON OF LATE SUDHAKARAN, VELLARAMKUNNIL, THEKKEVILA CHERRY, ERAVIPURAM VILLAGE, MANAGING PARTNER, M/S.METRO ENGINEERING AND AUTOMOBILE WORKS, POLAYATHODE, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.SREELAL N.WARRIER SRI.B.RAGHUNANDANAN SMT.A.SREEKALA (VAIKOM) RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS: --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SOMAKUMARI, AGED 58 YEARS, W/O.SUGATHAN, AYALATHU VEEDU, KOTTAKKAKOM WARD, KOLLAM WEST VILLAGE, PARTNER, M/S.METRO ENGINEERING AND AUTHOMOBILE WORKS, POLAYATHODE, KOLLAM-691 001. 2. REEJA SABU, AGED 37 YEARS, D/O.SOMAKUMARI, AYALATHU VEEDU, KOTTAKKAKOM WARD, KOLLAM WEST VILLAGE, PARTNER, M/S.METRO ENGINEERING AND AUTHOMOBILE WORKS, POLAYATHODE, KOLLAM-691 001. FAO.NO.254 OF 2010 3. BABURAJ, AGED 48 YEARS, BUSINESSMAN, SON OF GANGADHARAN, BABURAJ SADANAM, VADAKKEKARA MURI, ANGADIKKAL VILLAGE, ANGADIKKAL P.O., ADOOR TALUK, KOLLAM-691 001. ADV. SRI.P.B.SURESH KUMAR FOR R1,2 SRI.LEO GEORGE FOR R1,2 SRI.K.P.SUJESH KUMAR FOR R1,2 SRI.K.N.SASIDHARAN NAIR FOR R1,2 SRI.M.SUNIL FOR R1,2 SRI.P.B.SURESH KUMAR FOR R3 THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.M. JOSEPH & M. C. HARI RANI, JJ. ----------------------------------------- F.A.O. NO. 254 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 9th December, 2010. JUDGMENT K.M. Joseph, J. This is an Appeal filed challenging the order passed in I.A. Nos.4115/09 and 4116/09 in OS.No.979/09 on the file of the Additional Sub Court, Kollam. They are Applications filed by the plaintiff in the Suit seeking attachment and interim injunction. The Court below has rejected the Applications. It is feeling aggrieved by the same that the appellant is before us. 2. We heard Shri Sreelal Warriar, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri P.B. Sureshkumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 3. In the nature of the order we propose to pass, we do not think it necessary for us to advert to the contentions of the parties. Maintaining the interim order which we have passed, namely the FAO.NO.254/2010 2 ordering of interim injunction restraining the respondents from alienating the properties mentioned in I.A. No.4115/09 in the Suit, OS. No.979/09, we direct the Court below, in the circumstances, to dispose of the Suit itself finally on or before 31.3.2011. We make it clear that we have not expressed any view regarding the merits of the matter and the Court below will proceed to dispose of the Suit on merits, untrammeled by the order of injunction we have granted. Sd/= K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/= M.C. HARI RANI, JUDGE kbk. //True Copy// PS to Judge FAO.NO.254/2010 3