IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.PADMANABHAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 4TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 15TH MAGHA 1929 FAO.No. 303 of 2007() --------------------- I.A. NO.399/2005 IN AS.55/2005 of SUB COURT, PAYYANNUR .................... APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 3 & 4 --------------------------------------------- 1. PERIYAD THEEYA SAMUDAYA SANGHAM, P.O.MORAZHA, KANNUR DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT PRESIDENT, P.RAGHAVAN 2. PERIYAD THEEYA SAMUDAYA SANGHAM, P.O.MORAZHA, KANNUR DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESENT SECRETARY, KORAN. BY ADV. SRI.B.PREMNATH (E) RESPONDENTS: PETITIONERS & RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 -------------------------------------------- 1. K.VENUGOPALAN, S/O.OTHENAN, K.O.NILAYAM, PERIYAD, MORAZHA AMSOM, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. K.NARAYANAN, S/O.RAMAN, MACHIYATH HOUSE, PERIYAD, MORAZHA AMSOM, KANNUR DISTRICT. 3. K.NARAYANI, D/O.RAMAN, MACHIYATH HOUSE, PERIYAD, MORAZHA AMSOM, KANNUR DISTRICT. 4. PERIYAD THIYYA SAMUDAYA SMASAN COMMITTEE, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT PAROL BHASKARAN, AGED 46 YEARS, PERIYAD, MORAZHA AMSOM. 5. K.SUDHAKARAN, AGED 47 YEARS, K.S.R.T.C. BUS CONDUCTOR, SECRETARY OF PERIYAD THIYYA SAMUDAYA SMASAN COMMITTEE, PERIYAD, MORAZHA AMSOM. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.PADMANABHAN NAIR, J. ------------------------------------------- F.A.O.No.303 of 2007 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of February, 2008 JUDGMENT The F.A.O. is filed by the respondents 3 and 4 in A.S.No.55/05 challenging the order of injunction passed by the lower appellate court by which they were restrained from using the suit property as a burial ground. The plaintiffs filed a suit for injunction restraining the defendants from trespassing into suit property and committing waste. Originally there were two defendants. First defendant was Periyadu Thiyya Samudaya Smasana Committee represented by its President and second defendant was its Secretary. Against those defendants, the respondents filed a petition under Order 39 Rule 1 and Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code and sought for an injunction to restrain them from converting the suit property as a burial ground. An order of temporary injunction was passed against those defendants. Subsequently appellants were impleaded. The first appellant is Periyad Thiyya Samudaya Sangham represented by its President and second appellant is its Secretary. The suit FAO 303/2007 2 was dismissed by the trial court. The plaintiffs filed an appeal. In the appeal the appellants filed a petition for an order of temporary injunction restraining the respondents from using the suit property as a common burial ground. The lower appellate court passed an order of injunction. Challenging that order this appeal is filed. 2. The learned counsel for the appellants argued that there was no injunction order against the appellants during the pendency of the suit. According to them, they are using the place as a burial ground. This statement is disputed by the respondents. It is contended that the appellants did not bury any dead body in the disputed property during the pendency of this suit. It is argued that the appellants are having another burial ground and the dead bodies are being buried in that ground. It is also submitted that there is no sanction from the District Collector to use this place as a burial ground and if the appellants are allowed to use the same as a burial ground it will amounts to violation of statutory provisions. Considering all aspects of the matter, I am of the view that the F.A.O. Itself can be disposed of with a direction to dispose of the appeal as FAO 303/2007 3 expeditiously as possible with a direction to both sides to maintain statusquo as on the date of disposal of the suit. The interim order passed on 10.10.2007 is modified to that extent. I make it clear that I am not expressing any opinion regarding the merits of the rival contentions. The appeal is disposed in the above terms. The lower appellate court is directed to dispose of A.S.No.55/2005 as expeditiously as possible, at any rate before the courts close for summer vacation. K.PADMANABHAN NAIR, JUDGE csl