IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE TUESDAY, THE 20TH DECEMBER 2011 / 29TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 FAO.No. 294 of 2011() --------------------- OS.440/2011 of ADDL.SUB COURT, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT -------------------------------------------------- SARA, W/O. LATE THOTTIYAN VEETTIL JOHN, KODALI DESOM, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.BHARATHAN RESPONDENT/PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF ----------------------------------- MERY, W/O. KANJANGHOTTU MATHESW, CHELAKKATTUKARA DESOM, KUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.680121 ADV. SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN FOR R1 SMT.GEETHA P.MENON FOR R1 SRI.P.B.SUBRAMANYAN FOR R1 THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH & A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------------- F.A.O. No. 294 of 2011 -------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of December, 2011 J U D G M E N T K.M. Joseph, J. The appellant challenges the order passed in I.A.No.3172/2011 in O.S.No.440/2011. The interlocutory application was filed by the plaintiff in a suit for partition. The relief sought for in the interlocutory application was to restrain the defendant/appellant from alienating the petition schedule property in favour of the third parties or committing any acts of waste. The application was allowed. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and respondent. 3. The appellant is the wife of one Sri.John. Plaintiff is the sister of Sri.John. The appellant set up a defence on the basis of a Will. The complaint of the learned counsel for the appellant is that none of the documents which has been produced (nine in number) was adverted to. According to him, this is a clear case where the plaintiff has not able to establish a case for grant of injunction against alienation and -2- F.A.O. 294/2011 that the appellant widow entered into an agreement for sale of the property. Without entering any requisite finding necessary for the grant of injunction, the injunction is granted, it is submitted. Learned counsel for the respondent supported the order. 4. Having heard the parties, we feel that it is appropriate that the suit itself is disposed of at the earliest. 5. Accordingly, we direct the Additional Sub Judge , Irinjalakauda to take O.S. No.440/2011 and dispose of the suit itself finally on or before 30.6.2012 untrammelled by any observation contained in the impugned order. The parties to appear before the Additional Sub Judge on 02.1.2012. Pending interlocutory application is closed. K.M.JOSEPH,JUDGE A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE. rka