IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 18TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 29TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 130 of 2008(M) ------------------------ CMA.106/2007 of I ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, PALAKKAD OS.214/2007 of ADDL.SUB COURT, PALAKKAD .................... PETITIONER: RESPONDENT/PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF: -------------------------------------------- SATHEEDEVI, W/O.LATE VISWANATHAN, AGED 65 YEARS, ENGLISH CHURCH ROAD, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS RESPONDENT: APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT: -------------------------------------------- RAJESH, S/O.HARIDAS, VALLATTU VEEDU, MUNDAMPALAM, THRIKKAKARA VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK BY ADV. SRI.S.V.BALAKRISHNA IYER (SR.) SRI. PHILIP M. VARGHESE SRI.K.JAYAKUMAR SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO 130/08 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1. COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S. 214/07 ON THE FILES OF SUB COURT, PALAKKAD EXT.P2. COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT IN OS 214/07 EXT.P3. COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.1784/07 EXT.P4. COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 23.7.07 IN IA 1420/07 IN OS 214/07 ON THE FILES OF SUB COURT, PALAKKAD EXT.P5. COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 30.11.07 IN CMA 106/07 ON THE FILES OF SUB COURT, PALAKKAD RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R1(a). DT. NIL, ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, WADAKKANCHERRY /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE. M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- W.P.(C). NO. 130 OF 2008 --------------------- Dated this the 18th day of February, 2008 JUDGMENT This writ petition is preferred against the order of the District Court, Palakkad, in CMA 106/07. The said CMA is preferred against the order in IA 1420/07 in OS 214/07 pending before the Additional Subordinate Judge, Palakkad. In this appeal the learned District Judge set aside the order passed by the Subordinate Judge in IA 1420/07 and dismissed the application for injunction. It is aggrieved by that decision, the present writ petition is filed. 2. I heard the learned counsel appearing for both sides. OS 214/07 is a suit for injunction filed by the mother-in-law against the son-in-law. Another suit is filed by the mother-in-law against the son- in-law as OS 231/07 for setting aside the documents of sale. The contention is that the daughter, as the power of attorney holder of the mother, has executed a document in favour of her husband and it is the validity of that document that will decide the fate of both cases. Therefore instead of considering the matter piecemeal, I feel this is a fit case where I can direct the Subordinate Judge, where OS 214/07 WPC NO 130/08 2 and OS 231/07 are pending, to try the cases jointly and dispose of the same. In case if one of the cases is pending in the other court that can be made over to the Additional Subordinate Judges court for trail and disposal. I said so for the specific reason that the subject matter for the decision of the suits depends upon the validity of the documents in this case. I do not want to make any other observations in this case. 3. I direct the Additional Subordinate Judge, Palakkad to consider and dispose of OS 214/07 and OS 231/07 jointly. But I make it clear that the court below shall dispose of the matters untrammeled by any of the observations contained in its own order or the order of the appellate court. I also direct the court below, if possible, to dispose of the matter before the court closes for summer holidays. If any interim orders are to be passed, the same shall be on the basis of the orders prevailing at present. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps WPC NO 130/08 3