IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 22ND JULY 2008 / 31ST ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 21924 of 2008(I) -------------------------- OS.176/2008 of MUNSIFF COURT,MUVATTUPUZHA .................... PETITIONER: ------------ NARAYANAN NAIR, LAKSHMI SADANAM, PINDIMANA KARA, PINDIMANA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.M.P.MADHAVANKUTTY RESPONDENTS: ------------- JOY JOSEPH, KAROTHU HOUSE, MALAYANKEEZHU, KOTHAMANGALAM. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.21924 of 2008 ------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd July, 2008. J U D G M E N T This petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging Ext.P6 order passed by Munsiff, Muvattupuzha, in I.A.No.1814 of 2008 in O.S.No.176 of 2008, dismissing the prayer for joint trial of the suit with O.S.No.5 of 2008. O.S.No.176 of 2008 was filed by the petitioner seeking a decree for permanent prohibitory injunction in respect of the plaint A schedule property therein. O.S.No.5 of 2008 is filed by the respondent for a permanent prohibitory injunction restraining petitioner from altering the nature of the plaint C schedule property. 2. The argument of the learned counsel appearing for petitioner is that plaint B schedule property in O.S.No.176/2008 is the plaint C schedule property in O.S.No.5 of 2008 and actual dispute is with regard to the said way and in such circumstances learned Munsiff should have tried both the suits together. W.P.(C) No.21924/2008 2 3. On hearing the learned counsel and on going through Ext.P6 order, I do not find any illegality or irregularity warranting interference in the exercise of the powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Petitioner has no right to contend that his suit should be tried jointly with the suit filed by the respondent. Learned Munsiff for valid reasons found that the two suits are not to be tried jointly. The learned counsel however submitted that if joint trial is not ordered, there is a chance for conflicting decisions. That possibility could be ruled out if the same Munsiff is to try both the suits, though not jointly. In such circumstances, the petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE nj.