IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1932 OP(C).NO. 825 OF 2010(O) ------------------------ OS.214/2008 OF M.C.,VADAKKANCHERRY .................... PETITIONER: -------------------- RAJAN, AGED 60 YEARS, S/O.PALITHRA ITTI, KOLATHAZHATH, THEKKUMKARA VILLAGE, TALAPPILLY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THRESSIA, W/O.THAIKKADAN PORINCHU, MANGALAM DESOM, WADAKKANCHERY VILLAGE, TALAPPILLY TALUK. 2. PAUL, S/O.THAIKKADAN LONA, MANGALAM DESOM, WADAKKANCHERY VILLAGE, TALAPPILLY TALUK. 3. DAVIS, S/O.THAIKKADAN LONA, MANGALAM DESOM, WADAKKANCHERY VILLAGE, TALAPPILLY TALUK. 4. SHAJU, S/O.THAIKKADAN LONA, MANGALAM DESOM, WADAKKANCHERY VILLAGE, TALAPPILLY TALUK. 5. ELIA, W/O.THAIKKADAN OUSEPH, MANGALAM DESOM, WADAKKANCHERY VILLAGE, TALAPPILLY TALUK. THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== O.P(C) No.825 of 2010 ==================================== Dated this the 24th day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T Defendant No.3 in O.S. No.214 of 2008 of the court of learned Munsiff, Wadakkancherry is the petitioner before me aggrieved by Ext.P7, order dated November 11, 2010 on I.A. No.2298 of 2010. That was an application for simultaneous disposal of O.S. No.214 of 2008 and O.S. No.79 of 2008 (wrongly stated in the impugned order as O.S. No.78 of 2008). Learned Munsiff dismissed that application under the impression that it is for joint trial of the suits. Learned counsel contends that what is requested is not joint trial but only simultaneous disposal and hence dismissal of the application as if it is one for joint trial is not correct. 2. True, in the impugned order learned Munsiff has proceeded as if the application is for joint trial of the two suits. I consider that application as for simultaneous disposal of the cases as stated in the application. 3. Question is whether simultaneous disposal of the suits is required and the ultimate order passed by the learned Munsiff O.P(C) No.825 of 2010 -: 2 :- requires interference. O.S. No.79 of 2008 is filed by the petitioner and others against one Kunjuparu and Government officials. That concerned two items – item No.1, 17.2 Ares in Sy. No.1085/1 and item No.2, 80 cents in Sy. No.825. Respondents filed O.S. No.214 of 2008 against petitioner and two others (none of the defendants in O.S. No.79 of 2008 are parties in the said suit) concerning three items in plaint A schedule and one item in plaint B schedule. That is a suit for recovery of plaint B schedule property on the strength of title and for consequential injunction. According to the petitioner, plaint B schedule which is sought to be recovered formed part of plaint A schedule. It is seen from Ext.P1, plaint that A schedule items therein are properties comprised in Sy. No.1084/1 and 3 while plaint B schedule which is said to be forming part of plaint A schedule is comprised in Sy.No.1084/1 and 3. Admittedly these properties are different from the properties involved in O.S. No.79 of 2008. I must bear in mind that there is no request for joint trial obviously for the reason that there is no common question of law or fact arising in the suits. If so, there is no need to direct a simultaneous disposal of the suits. I am unable to understand how a simultaneous disposal would help the parties. Evidence adduced in one suit O.P(C) No.825 of 2010 -: 3 :- cannot be looked into for deciding the other suit. Evidence has to be let in separately. Hence no direction for simultaneous disposal is necessary. Learned Munsiff thought the application as one for joint trial. If found necessary, learned Munsiff is at liberty to dispose of the suits simultaneously, but no direction in that regard could be issued from this Court. In that view I do not find reason to entertain this petition. Original Petition is dismissed. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv