IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH APRIL 2009 / 18TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 12219 of 2009(O) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN IA.297/2009 IN OS.22/2008 of MUNSIFF COURT, ALATHUR .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- USSAIBA UMMA, W/O.ISMAIL, AGED 62 YEARS, MALAYANKULAMBU, ANJUMOORTHIMANGALAM P.O., MANGALAM AMSOM, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- AMINAKUTTY, D/O.ISMAIL, AGED 36 YEARS, MALAYANKULAMBU, ANJUMOORTHIMANGALAM P.O., MANGALAM AMSOM, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ---------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.12219 of 2009 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of April, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the defendant in O.S.No.22 of 2008, on the file of the Munsiff Court, Alathur. The suit was filed for permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendant from alienating the plaint schedule property or inducting third parties in the plaint schedule property. It is stated that the suit was dismissed on 27.2.2009. After the disposal of the suit, I.A.No.297 of 2009 was filed by the plaintiff for injunction. It was stated in the affidavit that certified copy of the judgment was not received and therefore, she could not file an appeal against the decree. The court below passed an order of injunction to be in operation for a period of one month from the date of decree. The date of decree being 27.2.2009, the order passed by the court below in I.A.No.297 of 2009 expired on 26.3.2009. The Writ Petition challenging the injunction order is filed on 7.4.2009. The Writ Petition is thus against an order which is not in force. On that ground, the Writ Petition is dismissed. However, if any extension of the injunction order was granted by the court below, dismissal of this Writ Petition would not preclude the petitioner from challenging the same. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl