IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID FRIDAY, THE 24TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 2ND ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 26419 of 2009(O) -------------------------- CMA.23/2009 of DISTRICT COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA OS.451/2008 of MUNSIFF COURT, RANNI .................... PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. C.K.RAJENDRAN, 58 YEARS, PALAKKUNNATHU HOUSE KOLZHENCHERY EAST P.O., KOZHENCHERRY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. RAGHU.K., AGED 50 YEARS, KAYALAKATHU HOUSE, KAITHAKODI P.O., KOTTATHUR MURI, AYIROOR VILLAGE, RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.N.N.SASI RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. LAKSHIAMMA. 86 YEARS, KAYALAKATHU USHUS, KAITHKODI P.O., KOTTATHUR MURI, AYIROOR VILLAGE, RANNY TALUK, REP.BY THE POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER C.K.RAGHAVAN, S/O.KUNJUKUNJU, CHARUVUKALAYIL AYIROOR, RANNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. RAMACHANDRA PANICKER, 60 YEARS, KAYALAKATHU USHUS, AYIRROOR, RANNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA, REP.BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER C.K.RAGHAVAN, S/O.KUNJUKUNJU CHARUVUKALAYIL, AYROOR, RANNY, PATHANAMTHITTA. 3. C.K.RAVINDRAN, 55 YEARS, KAYALAKATHU USHUS, AYIROOR, RANNY TALUK, REP.BY POWER OF TOORNEY HOLDER RAGHAVAN S/O.KUNJUKUNJU, CHARUVUKALAYIL AYIROOR, RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA. ADV. SRI.V.SETHUNATH FOR R1 TO 3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 26419 of 2009(O) APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: PLAINT IN O.S.NO.451/08 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, RANNI. EXT.P2: EXTRACT OF THE OBJECTION TO I.A.NO.16663/08 IN O.S.NO.451/08. EXT.P3: WILL DEED DATED 18.07.2006 EXECUTED BY KRISHNAN IN FAVOUR OF FIRST DEFENDANT. EXT.P4: AGREEMENT DATED 30.04.2002 IN FAVOUR OF THE DEFENDANTS. EXT.P5: ORDER IN I.A.NO.1663/08 IN O.S.NO.451/08 OF MUNSIFF COURT, RANNI. EXT.P6: JUDGMENT DATED 23.4.2009 IN C.M.A.NO.23/2009 OF THE DISTRICT COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL ..... // TRUE COPY // P.A TO JUDGE. HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ------------------------ W.P.(C).No.26419 Of 2009 ---------------------- Dated this the 24th day of September, 2010. J U D G M E N T Petitioners are the defendants in O.S.No.451 of 2008 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Ranni. This petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging Ext.P6 judgment passed by the District Court, Pathanamthitta in C.M.A.No.23 of 2009. 2. The plaintiffs in the suit filed I.A.No.1663 of 2008 for a temporary injunction restraining the defendants from committing any waste or damage in the plaint schedule property and from cutting and removing valuable trees from the plaint schedule properties till the disposal of the suit. Munsiff Court, Ranni by order dated 4.3.2009 dismissed the I.A. Ext.P5 is the order. Plaintiffs challenged Ext.P5 order before the District Court, Pathanamthitta in C.M.A.No.23 of 2009. The appellate court set aside Ext.P5 order and allowed I.A.No.1663 of 2008 granting interim injunction till the disposal of the suit. 3. Suit was filed for partition. The prayer in the I.A is to pass an order of injunction restraining the defendants from committing any damage or waste in the plaint schedule property W.P.(C).No.26419 Of 2009 ::2:: and from cutting and removing valuable trees from the plaint schedule property. After considering the merits of the case, the District Court, Pathanamthitta found that the approach of the trial court was not just and proper, that the trial court failed to consider the circumstances in the correct perspective and therefore the findings of the trial court is set aside. The appellate court also found that the challenge against the order passed by the learned Munsiff is sustainable and the plaintiffs in the suit are entitled to the equitable relief prayed for. This Court is of the view that the petitioners have not made out any valid ground to interfere with Ext.P6 order passed by the District Court, Pathanamthitta. The suit is of the year 2008. In the facts and circumstances of the case there will be a direction to the Munsiff Court, Ranni to dispose of the suit within a period of nine months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is dismissed subject to the observations made above. HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge. bkn/-