IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 10TH JULY 2009 / 19TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 18274 of 2009(O) -------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30/05/2008 IN IA.722 /2008 IN OS.96/2008 of MUNSIFF COURT, KUTHUPARAMBA. .................... PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. P.SANKARANKUTTY,S/O.S.VELAYUDHAN NAIR, MANAGING PARTNER,T.S.K.TRADERS, SOUTH BAZAAR, KANNUR. 2. SMT.A.SUJATHA,W/O.T.SANKARANKUTTY, PARTNER,T.S.K.TRADERS,SOUTH BAZAR,KANNUR. BY MR.T.P.KELU NAMBIAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE ADV. MR.P.G.RAJAGOPALAN MR.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. T.NARAYANAN, S/O.S.VELAYUDHAN NAIR, 'NANDANAM', NEAR MADHAVI SCHOOL,KIZHANTHIMUKKU, P.O.THIRUVANGAD,THALASSERY. 2. SATHIRATHNAM,W/O.T.NARAYANAN,'NANDANAM' NEAR MADHAVI SCHOOL,KIZHANTHIMUKKU, P.O.THIRUVANGAD, THALASSERY. 3. SREEKALA OXYGEN COMPANY, MALE-CHELARI, MATHAPUZHA ROAD,P.O.THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.18274 OF 2009 (O) ----------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of July, 2009 J U D G M E N T The writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: (i) to call for the records relating to Exts.P1 to P9. (ii) to set aside/quash Exts.P8 and P9. (iii) to pass an interim order of injunction as prayed for in Ext.P6 (iv) to issue such other order or direction as may be deemed appropriate by this Hon'ble Court. 2. Petitioners are the plaintiffs in O.S.No.96/2006 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Kuthuparamba. Suit is one for perpetual prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from filling up and circulating gas cylinders, 355 in number, which are stated to be the absolute property of the plaintiffs. With the suit, plaintiffs moved an application for interim WPC.18274/09 2 injunction restraining the defendants from filling up the gas cylinders and distributing them to the customers till the disposal of the suit. Respondents in the petition are the defendants in the suit. The learned Munsiff, after considering the objections raised by the defendants to the I.A., declined the interim relief sought for by the plaintiffs. Aggrieved by that order, plaintiffs filed an appeal before the Sub Court, Thalassery. After hearing both sides, the appeal was also dismissed. Impeaching the correctness and propriety of the judgment rendered by the appellate court, this writ petition has been filed by the plaintiffs invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 3. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. From the submissions made and taking note of the facts and circumstances presented with reference to the materials tendered in the writ petition, I find the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this Court in the given facts of the case cannot be invoked to interfere with the concurrent findings entered by WPC.18274/09 3 the two courts below that the plaintiffs are not entitled to the discretionary relief applied for. The learned counsel for the petitioners would urge that some of the observations made in the judgment by the appellate court as well as by the learned Munsiff may have some reflection or bearing in the trial and disposal of the suit, and so much so, appropriate directions may be issued to the learned Munsiff to consider and dispose the suit on merits on the basis of the evidence to be let in the case. Needless to point out, whatever observations or views are stated while disposing the I.A. by the court should have no reflection in the final decision to be taken, which no doubt, has to be arrived on the materials tendered in the case. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and to alley the apprehension raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners, I make it clear that the learned Munsiff shall dispose the suit untrammelled by any of the observations in its order or the judgment rendered by the appellate court. Having regard to the fact that the dispute relate to gas cylinders, which come under the Essential Commodities Act and the Orders passed thereunder, and the apprehension WPC.18274/09 4 canvassed by the learned counsel for the petitioners that any untoward incident arising from such property over which they claim title may cause them irreparable injury subjecting them to prosecution under the penal provisions as well when the gas cylinders continue to be retained in unlawful custody by the respondents, I find an expeditious disposal of the suit is warranted to advance the ends of justice. So much so, the learned Munsiff is directed to give the suit top priority in hearing and to take every endeavor for its expeditious disposal, but, after giving sufficient opportunity to both parties to lead evidence in respect of their respective case, at any rate, before the closing of the Christmas Vacation. Handover a copy of this judgment to the counsel for the petitioners on usual terms and send a copy of this judgment to the court below forthwith. Writ petition is disposed with the above directions. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE prp WPC.18274/09 5