IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2009 / 10TH CHAITHRA 1931 RSA.No. 308 of 2009 --------------------------------- AS.198/2004 of III ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, TRIVANDRUM OS.1367/2002 of II ADDL.M.C., TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT/APPELLANT/DEFENDANT: V.MOHANAKUMAR, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O.VELAYUDHAN PILLAI, T.C.8/1109 (1), THUNDUVILA VEEDU, THIRUMALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.G.PARAMESWARA PANICKER, SR. SRI.R.SUDHIR RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF: V.K.GIRISH KUMAR, AGED 40, S/O.VELAPPAN NAIR, RESIDING AT PADMAVILASOM, THIRUMALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.THIRUMALA P.K.MANI (CAVEATOR) THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.P. Balachandran, J. -------------------------- R.S.A.No.308 of 2009 -------------------------- JUDGMENT Heard counsel for the appellant. 2. The appeal arising from the common judgment, namely, R.S.A.No.309/09, has been admitted on this day on substantial question of law formulated therein on this day. This Regular Second Appeal is filed assailing the decree of injunction passed in favour of the plaintiff in O.S.No.1367/02, which was disposed of by the trial court and by the first appellate court by common judgments. The prayer for recovery of possession also is there in O.S.No. 1040/99, from which R.S.A.No.309/09 has arisen. Hence, the decree granted in favour of the plaintiff in O.S.No.1367/02 does not deserve to be interfered with unless and until this Court reverses the concurrent judgments in O.S.No.1040/99. In the result, I dismiss this Regular Second Appeal observing that the rights of the parties RSA 308/09 2 will abide by the decision in R.S.A.No.309/09. It is made clear that dismissal of this Regular Second Appeal shall not operate as res judicata in R.S.A. No.309/09 in any manner whatsoever. 31st March, 2009 (K.P.Balachandran, Judge) tkv