IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 24TH MAY 2010 / 3RD JYAISHTA 1932 WP(C).NO. 15759 OF 2010(O) ----------------------------------------- (AGAINST I.A. NO.5127OF 2009 IN O.S. NO.749 OF 2009 MUNSIFF'S COURT, KOLLAM) PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- ANTONY JERAVAS, @ ANTONY FERNANDEZ, @ KUNJUMON, S/O.LATE JERAVAS, VAYALIL KODIYIL (VAREECHAZHIKOM VEEDU) KUREEPUZHA, THRIKKADAVOOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL SMT.P.S.PREETHA SRI.SAIJU S. SRI.C.SINOY RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------- 1. PATRESHIA JOSEPH, W/O.JOSEPH, JERAVAS, ROMA VILLA, ST.ANDREWS, ST.XAVIERS COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPRUAM FROM VAYALAN KODIYIL VEEDU, KUREEPUZHA, THRIKKADAVOOR, KOLLAM. 2. JOSEPH JERAVAS, ROMA VILLA, ST.ANDREWS, ST.XAVIERS COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM FROM VAYALAN KODIYIL VEEDU, KUREEPUZHA, THRIKKADAVOOR, KOLLAM. 3. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, PERINAD, KOLLAM. 4. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDHYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. RESPONDENT NOS.3 AND 4 ARE DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY VIDE JUDGMENT DATED 24.05.2010 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== W.P(C) No.15759 of 2010 ==================================== Dated this the 24th day of May, 2010 J U D G M E N T This Writ Petition is filed in a pending suit in which respondent Nos.3 and 4 are not parties. Purpose of arraying respondent Nos.3 and 4 in this proceeding is to challenge an order passed by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kollam concerning use of electricity in the residential building situated in the disputed property. Since respondent Nos.3 and 4 are not parties to the suit they cannot be arrayed as respondents in this Writ Petition. Hence without prejudice to the right of petitioner to challenge the order concerning use of electricity if he is otherwise entitled to such a course by way of separate Writ Petition or other proceedings as per law respondent Nos.3 and 4 are deleted from the party array. Registry shall delete respondent Nos.3 and 4 from the cause title of the Writ Petition. 2. Otherwise, challenge in this Writ Petition is to the procedure adopted by the learned Munsiff in proceeding with the petition filed by respondent Nos.1 and 2 for prosecution of petitioner for alleged violation of an ex parte interim order of W.P(C) No.15759 of 2010 -: 2 :- injunction without disposing of I.A. No.5127 of 2009, the application for temporary injunction. Dispute is concerning residence in the house in the disputed property between petitioner and respondent No.1. On I.A. No.5127 of 2009 learned Munsiff passed an ex parte interim order of injunction against petitioner and in favour of respondent No.1. Alleging that the said order was disobeyed by the petitioner, respondent No.1 initiated action under Order XXXIX Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure. In the meantime petitioner filed Ext.P3, objection to I.A. No.5127 of 2009. Grievance of the petitioner is that without considering the report of Advocate Commissioner which according to the petitioner would support his case of possession of the suit property, learned Munsiff is proceeding to dispose of the petition for prosecution which would prejudice him. 3. It is not as if without disposing of I.A. No.5127 of 2009 petition for alleged disobeyance of the interim order of injunction cannot be proceeded against. It is for the learned Munsiff to consider whether I.A. No.5127 of 2009 should be disposed of in the light of the objection filed by the petitioner before or after the petition for prosecution is disposed of or simultaneously with the said petition. I make it clear that it will be open to the petitioner W.P(C) No.15759 of 2010 -: 3 :- to request the learned Munsiff to dispose of I.A. No.5127 of 2009 as early as possible. Hence without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to file fresh Writ Petition or other proceedings as per law against respondent Nos.3 and 4 if he is otherwise entitled to do so in respect of the order referred to in paragraph 1 above this Writ Petition is closed. If any request for early hearing of I.A. No.5127 of 2009 is made by petitioner, learned Munsiff shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders considering the circumstances urged by the petitioner. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv