IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID FRIDAY, THE 19TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 28TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 37239 of 2008(G) --------------------------------------- [CMA.NOS.38/08, 39/08 & 40/08 OF DISTRICT COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, OS.NO.2/2008 OF II ADDL.SUB COURT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- CHANDRASEKHARAN NAIR, S/O. KUMARAPILLAI, JANAKIMANDIRAM, LEKSHMI NAGAR, EDAGRAMAM, KARUMOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. SRI.RAM MOHAN.G, SRI.G.P.SHINOD, SRI.MANU V. RESPONDENT: ---------------------- INDULEKHA, D/O. SANTHA NAIR, INDEEVARAM, T.C 50/459(9) MARTHOORKADAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. SRI.V.SURESH, SRI.G.SUDHEER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/11/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.37239/2008-G: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S. 2/2008 OF THE 2ND ADDL. SUB COURT. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DTD. 14/11/2007 EXECUTED BY THE RESPONDENT IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 18/12/2007. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE REPLY NOTICE DTD. 19/12/2007. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE I.A. 294/2008 IN O.S. 2/2008 OF THE 2ND ADDL. SUB COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE I.A. 295/2008 IN O.S. 2/2008 OF THE 2ND ADDL. SUB COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE COMMISSION REPORT WHICH IS MARKED AS EXT.C1 IN THE SUIT. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DTD. 19/03/2008 IN I.A. 19/2008, I.A. 294/2008 AND I.A. 295/2008 IN O.S. 2/2008 OF THE 2ND ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DTD. 03/10/2008 IN CMA.38/2008, CMA.39/2008 AND CMA 40/2008 OF THE IIND ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. HARUN-UL-RASHID,J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO. 37239 OF 2008 ------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2010 JUDGMENT Plaintiff in O.S.No.2/08 on the file of the II Additional Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram is the petitioner herein. Respondent is the defendant in the suit. This writ petition is filed seeking to set aside Ext.P8 interim order of the trial court and Ext.P9 judgment of the Appellate Court in the appeal filed challenging Ext.P8 order. 2. The plaintiff filed I.A.No.19/2008 praying for temporary prohibitory injunction to restrain the defendant from demolishing the compound wall and making any construction and from installing any gate. I.A.Nos.294/2008 and 295/2008 were filed by the defendant in the suit. I.A.No.294/08 was filed praying to vacate the order of interim injunction passed in I.A.No.19/08. I.A.No.295/2008 was filed by the defendant for prohibitory injunction to restrain the plaintiff in the suit from trespassing into -2- WP(C).No.37239/2008 the property of the defendant and from causing any disturbance or interference to her peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property. In the said application the defendants also prayed for mandatory injunction to restore the status quo ante by dismantling or removing the newly constructed wall and to close down the new opening made in the northern boundary of the property of the defendants. The trial court passed a common order in the above I.As., which is produced as Ext.P8. By Ext.P8 order the trial court restrained the plaintiff from trespassing into the property of the defendant and from interfering with her peaceful possession and enjoyment and also passed an interim mandatory injunction to restore the status quo ante by dismantling and removing the newly constructed wall and to close down the new opening. 3. Aggrieved by Ext.P8 order the plaintiff preferred three appeals. Ext.P9 is the common judgment passed by the Appellate Court, by which the Appellate Court confirmed the order passed by the trial court. -3- WP(C).No.37239/2008 4. In the writ petition the plaintiff challenged Ext.P8 order and Ext.P9 judgment. This Court stayed the operation of Ext.P8 and Ext.P9. This Court also passed an interim injunction restraining the respondent from demolishing the western wall of plaint B schedule property and form installing any gate therein. This order was passed on 17/12/2008 and the said order is continuing till date. 5. When the matter was taken up for consideration, after hearing the parties, this Court is of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of without going into the merits of the contentions of the parties, in the light of the interim order passed by this Court, which continues to operation from 17/12/2008 till date. In the interest of justice, this Court is of the view that the suit itself can be directed to be disposed of within a time limit. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the II Additional Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram to dispose of the suit within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. As an -4- WP(C).No.37239/2008 interim measure, the temporary injunction granted by the trial court restraining the plaintiff from trespassing into the property of the defendants and from causing any disturbance or interference of her peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property, shall continue till the disposal of the suit. The interim order passed by this Court staying the operation of Exts.P8 order and Ext.P9 judgment, also shall continue till the disposal of the suit, subject to the injunction order referred above. Writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge. kcv. -5- WP(C).No.37239/2008