IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 30TH OCTOBER 2008 / 8TH KARTHIKA 1930 CRP.No. 748 of 2008(E) ---------------------------- CMA.3/2008 OF D.C.,THODUPUZHA OS.208/2007 OF MUNSIFF COURT,THODUPUZHA .................... PETITIONER/ APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF: ---------------------------------------------------- VIJAYAMMA, W/O. CHANDRAN, ATTUPURATHU HOUSE, IRUTTUTHODU, NEDIYASALA, PURAPUZHA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.SAJU.S.A RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS: -------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. JAYAN, S/O. SAHADEVAN, VELLIKATTIL (NEYYAPPAM THOTTATHIL) HOUSE, IRUTTUTHODU, MELPURAPUZHA KARA, NEDIYASALA, P.O PURAPUZHA VILLAGE. 2. SREENIVASAN, S/O. KUMARAN, KOTTARATHIL HOUSE, IRUTTUTHODU, MELPURAPPUZHA KARA.P.O, NEDIYASALA, PURAPUZHA VILLAGE. 3. SUBASH @ KUTTAI, S/O. GOPALAN, CHARAMPURATHU (PUTHENPURAYIL) HOUSE, IRUTTUTHODU, MELPURAPUZHA KARA.P.O, NEDIYASALA, PURAPUZHA VILLAGE. 4. SAJI, S/O. MATHAI (MUNDACKMATTATHIL), KUZHIKATTUKUNNEL HOUSE, IRUTTUTHODU, MELPURAPUZHA KARA.P.O, NEDIYASALA, PURAPUZHA VILLAGE. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. ------------------------------ C. R.P.No. 748 of 2008 ------------------------------ Dated this the 30th day of October, 2008 O R D E R Heard. 2. Petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S. No.208 of 2007 of the Munsiff's Court, Thodupuzha. That is a suit for decree for prohibitory injunction to restrain the respondents from trespassing into the schedule property, destroying its boundaries and other improvements. There was also an application for temporary injunction on which learned Munsiff granted exparte ad interim order of injunction. Complaining disobeyance of the interim order of injunction, petitioner filed I.A. No.1031 of 2007 under Order 39 Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, 'the Code'). Petitioner alleged that the respondents, in disobeyance of the order of injunction trespassed into schedule property on 18/09/2007 at 10.15 A.M and destroyed the compound wall. Respondents denied that allegation. 3. Petitioner did not adduce any evidence in support of the allegation that the effect that the respondents disobeyed the order of C.R.P. No. 748 /2008 2 injunction. Report submitted by the Advocate Commissioner stated that the boundary of the schedule property was interfered with. Petitioner had to prove that demolition of the boundary was by or at the instance of respondents. There is absolutely no evidence in that lines. On the other hand, learned Munsiff has noted that on the date of alleged disobedience i.e. 18/09/2007, respondents were present in the court. It is in the above circumstances that learned Munsiff dismissed I.A. No.1031 of 2007. I do not find any illegality or irregularity in the order under challenge requiring interference. The Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE scm