IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 26TH AUGUST 2008 / 4TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 25727 of 2008(K) -------------------------- CMA.8/2007 OF SUB COURT, PERUMBAVOOR OS.186/2007 OF MUNSIFF COURT, PERUMBAVOOR .................... PETITIONER: -------------- MARY W/O BABY, MALEKUDY HOUSE, IRINGOLE KARA, PERUMBAVOOR VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.N.K.KARNIS RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. GEORGE UTHUP, S/O UTHUP,THADIKULANGARA HOUSE, AIMURI KARA, KOOVAPPADY VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, 2. JOY, S/O OUSEPH, KEECHERRY HOUSE, AIMURI KARA, KOOVAPPADY VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, 3. VIMALA, W/O RAMAN PILLAI, PADICKAL PUTHEN VEEDU, AIMURI KARA, KOOVAPPADY VILLAGE. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) NO.25727 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 26th day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is the defendant and respondents the plaintiffs in O.S.186 of 2007. In that suit, respondents filed I.A.1368 of 2007, an application for an order or temporary injunction till disposal of the suit. Under Ext.P4 order, an order of temporary injunction was granted restraining petitioner from making any construction in the plaint B schedule property. Petitioner challenged that order before Sub Court, Perumbavoor in C.M.A.8 of 2007. Learned Sub Judge, under Ext.P4 order, confirmed the order of temporary injunction. Thereafter, petitioner filed I.A.1126 of 2008, an application under Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, which could only be a petition under Rule 4 of Order XXXIX of the Code. Under Ext.P10 order, learned Munsiff dismissed the application rejecting the prayer to modify Ext.P4 order permitting the construction. This petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India to set aside Ext.P5 and P10 orders. WP(C)25727/08 2 2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner was heard. 3. Learned Munsiff and the learned Sub Judge granted an order of temporary injunction till disposal of the suit entering a finding of prima facie case in favour of the respondents and that balance of convenience is in their favour. In the light of the said findings in Ext.P4 and P5 orders, this Court cannot interfere with those orders, as sought for. When Ext.P4 and P5 orders are there, petitioner cannot be permitted to construct the building as sought for in I.A. 1126 of 2008. Therefore Ext.P10 also cannot be interfered. If the petitioner is to be permitted to construct the building and ultimately a decree is to be granted in favour of respondents, it will cause unnecessary hardship and injury to the respondents. In such circumstances, the relief sought for cannot be granted. But considering the fact that by the order of injunction respondents are prevented from constructing a building, Munsiff , Perumbavoor is directed to dispose O.S.186 of 2007 as expeditiously as possible, if the pre-trial steps are over. M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE Okb/-