IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 29TH OCTOBER 2010 / 7TH KARTHIKA 1932 OP(C).No. 505 of 2010(O) ------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER ON IA NO.3809/2010 IN OS 24/2004 & IA NO.3811/2009 IN OS 326/2004 of ADDL.MUNSIFF COURT, ALAPPUZHA .................... PETITIONER (S): -------------------- 1. DOTTY THOMAS, AGED 52 YEARS, SON OF THOMAS, KANJIRATHINKAL HOUSE, P.O. AVALOOKUNNOO, ALLEPPEY. 2. T.M.MICHAEL, AGED 51 YEARS, SON OF MICHAEL, THEVARY HOUSE, P.O.THATHAMPALLY, ALLEPPEY. BY ADV. SRI.JOHN JOSEPH VETTIKAD SRI.C.JOSEPH JOHNY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. CATHOLIC YOUNG MEN ASSOCIATION (CYMA), THATHAMPALLY, REP. BY ITS PERMANENT PRESIDENT FR.JOSEPH PULICKAL, VICAR, ST.MICHAEL CHURCH, THATHAMPALLY, ALLEPPEY - 688 001. 2. JIBU MATHEW, AGED 45 YEARS, SON OF MATHEW, VADAYIL HOUSE, THATHAMPALLY, ALLEPPEY - 688 001. 3. DOMINIC SEBASTIAN, AGED 52 YEARS, SON OF SEBASTIAN, KARIMPANNOOR HOUSE, THATHAMPALLY, ALLEPPEY - 688 001. 4. JOSEPH MATHEW, AGED 35 YEARS, SON OF MATHEW, MALAYIL HOUSE, THATHAMPALLY, ALLEPPEY 688001. 5. THOMMY JOSEPH, THATTUNKAL HOUSE, ARYAD NORTH VILLAGE - 683 101. 6. THOMAS ANTONY, UNNECHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, ARYAD SOUTH VILLAGE, NOW UNNECHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, MAYITHARA, CHERTHALA 688524. THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== O.P(C) No.505 of 2010 ==================================== Dated this the 29th day of October, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioners before me are plaintiffs in O.S. Nos.24 and 326 of 2004 of the court of learned Principal Munsiff, Alappuzha. Both the suits are for a decree for prohibitory injunction; former being against alienation of properties of respondent No.1 and against withdrawal of amount from its accounts and the latter being against inducting third parties into the buildings belonging to respondent No.1. Suits were dismissed after recording evidence. Petitioners, I am told have applied for carbon copy of the judgment but so far it has not been received. In the meantime they filed Exts.P3 and P4, applications to keep the judgments in abeyance. Those applications were dismissed by Exts.P5 and P6 observing that it would amount to granting of injunction, having found that petitioners are not entitled to the injunction prayed for. Learned counsel states that if before appeals are preferred and interim orders are obtained respondents who are directed to maintain present condition it might alter the situation to the prejudice of the petitioners. According to the learned counsel for petitioners respondent Nos.2 onwards have no right to act on behalf of O.P(C) No.505 of 2010 -: 2 :- respondent No.1. It is also submitted that until dismissal of the suits there was an order of injunction in force in both the suits. 2. I am told that petitioners have applied for carbon copy of the judgments in the suits. Having regard to the circumstances stated I am persuaded to think that respondents are to be directed to maintain present condition of the suit properties. Resultantly, this Original Petition is disposed of in the following lines: (i) Learned Principal Munsiff, Alappuzha is directed to issue carbon copy of the judgments in O.S. No.24 and 326 of 2004 of that court if applied for on usual terms within ten days from this day. (ii) Respondents are directed to maintain the present condition of the properties and accounts of respondent No.1 for a period of fifteen days from this day. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv