IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN THURSDAY, THE 23RD JULY 2009 / 1ST SRAVANA 1931 FAO.No. 126 of 2007() --------------------- OS.211/2007 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,ERNAKULAM .................... (S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF -------------------------------------------------- P.P.VARGHESE, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.LATE PETER, PUTHENPURAKKAL HOUSE, VALLARPADAM DESOM, VALLARPADAM P.O., MULAVUKAD VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.BABU SMT.N.SUDHA. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KOCHUTHRESIA, AGED 69 YEARS, W/O.LATE PETER, PUTHENPURAKKAL HOUSE, VALLARPADAM DESOM, VALLARPADAM PO, MULAVUKAD VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. PHILOMINA BABY, AGED 47 YEARS, W/O.GEORGE BABY, MUDAVUSSERY HOUSE, MALIPPURAM P.O., ELAMKUNNAPUZHA VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. MARY JOSEPH, AGED 41 YEARS, W/O.V.J.JOSEPH, VALIYAVEETTIL HOUSE, AZHEEKKAL P.O., FORT KOCHI VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK, PIN-682 510. ADV. SRI.P.K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMAN & P.BHAVADASAN, JJ. -------------------------------------------------------- FAO 126 OF 2007 -------------------------------------------------------- Dated 23rd July 2009 Judgment RAMAN, J. The appeal is directed against an order passed by the court below, dismissing the application for temporary injunction after hearing both sides. The suit is one for partition. The appellant is the plaintiff. Though an ex parte interim injunction was granted, subsequently, the suit was dismissed on the defendant entering appearance and contesting the matter. Hence this appeal. 2. The appellant contends that the property originally belonged to his grandfather and though purchase certificate was obtained by his mother, it should be deemed as one obtained for and on behalf of her and also on behalf of the other legal heirs. The whole case is set up on that basis. But, the evidence on record would show that the grandfather had sold the property in favour of his daughter by registered assignment deed. Ext.B1 is the certified copy of the sale deed. It is subsequently that FAO 126/07 2 Ext.B2 purchase certificate was obtained. The court below entered a finding recording that Exts.B1 and B2 are not disputed. The above documents would prima facie show that the daughter is in possession of the property. In such circumstances, the court below has rightly declined to grant injunction. We also find that the balance of convenience is not in favour of the appellant. The other questions raised in this appeal are to be decided in the suit. Hence we find no merit in this appeal and it is accordingly dismissed. P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE sta FAO 126/07 3