IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2009 / 7TH SRAVANA 1931 FAO.No. 81 of 2007() -------------------- OS.599/1991 of I ADDL.SUB COURT, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT/1ST RESPONDENT/1ST DEFENDANT:- NOCHIKKATTIL KAMALAKSHI @ LAKSHMI AMMA, D/O.KALYANI AMMA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, RESIDING AT PANARKANDIYIL, KOKKALLOOR, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. MR. C.P.MOHAMMED NIAS RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 2 TO 5/PLAINTIFF & DEFENDANTS 2 TO 5:- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. VADAKKE AREEPURATH BALAKRISHNAN, AGED 71 YEARS, S/O.LATE KANARAN, RESIDING AT CHEEKAT PARAMBIL, NANMINDA AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. 2. AMMALU AMMA, AGED 63 YEARS, W/O.APPUNNI NAIR, PAVITHRALAYATHIL, VATAKA TALUK, VILLYAPPALLY AMSOM, MAYYANNOOR DESOM. 3. PAVITHRAN, AGED 43 YEARS, PAVITHRALAYATHIL, VATAKA TALUK, VILLYAPPALLY AMSOM, MAYYANNOOR DESOM. 4. VINODAN, AGED 41 YEARS, PAVITHRALAYATHIL, VATAKA TALUK, VILAYAPPALLY AMSOM, MAYYANNOOR DESOM. 5. SURESH, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, PAVITHRALAYATHIL, VATAKA TALUK, VILLYAPPALLY AMSOM, MAYYANNOOR DESOM. ADV. MR. JACOB ABRAHAM FOR R1 THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR , J. -------------------------------------------------- F.A.O. No. 81 of 2007 ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of July, 2009. JUDGMENT The 1st defendant in O.S. No. 599 of 1991 on the file of the Sub Court, Kozhikode is the appellant in this appeal. The said suit instituted by the 1st respondent herein is one for a declaration as well as a prohibitory injunction. The suit was decreed by the trial court. Aggrieved by the decree, the 1st defendant filed an appeal as A.S. No. 228 of 1998 before this Court. This Court set aside the judgment and decree passed by the trial court and remanded the case to the trial court with a direction to re-cast the issues. Thereafter, the plaintiff filed I.A. No. 4106 of 2006 before the trial court for an interim mandatory injunction. Even though the said application was vehemently opposed, it was allowed as per the impugned order dated 09.02.2007 directing the 1st defendant/appellant to remove the temporary fence put up in the plaint B schedule property and also to remove the tapioca vegetation from the property F.A.O. No. 81/2007 : 2 : within four months from the date of the order. It is aggrieved by the said order that this appeal has been filed. This Court admitted this appeal and had granted a stay of operation of the impugned order. 2. The suit itself is of the year 1991. It should have been tried and disposed of long ago. The parties cannot be allowed to agitate over the interlocutory application. Hence this appeal is disposed of without adjudicating on the merits or otherwise of the impugned order, with a direction to the trial court to dispose of the suit itself untramelled by the observations in the impugned order. Status quo as on today shall be maintained by both sides. The parties shall appear before the trial court on 25.08.2009 without any further notice. Every endeavour shall be made to dispose of the suit within seven months of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Dated this the 29th day of July, 2009. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. F.A.O. No. 81/2007 : 3 : rv