IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD DECEMBER 2009 / 2ND POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 37512 of 2009(O) --------------------------------------- O.S. NO.137/2009 OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT, CHERTHALA. ......... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ M/S/HOTEL AROOR RESIDENCY 7/492, AROOR, REP.BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, TOMY JOSEPH, S/O. C.M.JOSEPH, AGED 37, CHERKOTT HOUSE, ARAKUZHA, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. MR.JOHNSON MANAYANI RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------- 1. P.K.DINESHAN, AGED 43, S/O. KESAVAN, PUNNACKAL HOUSE, KUTHIATHODE, CHERTHALA. 2. SINDHU DINESHAN, W/O. P.K.DINESHAN, AGED 37, PUNNACKAL HOUSE, KUTHIATHODE CHERTHALA , ALAPPUZHA. 3. P.K.PRASAD, S/O. KESAVAN, AGED 44, PUNNACKAL HOUSE, 13/264, DWARAKA, THURAVOOR, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 4. BINDHU PRASAD, W/O. P.K.PRASAD, AGED 37, PUNNACKAL HOUSE, DWARAKA 13.264, THURAVOOR CHERTHALA , ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 5. P.R.SANU, S/O. RAMAN KUNJU, AGED 46, CHIRAPPURATHU HOUSE, WARD NO.12 OF CHERTHALA MUNICIPALITY, KOKOTHAMANGALAM VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 6. N.K.PUSHKARAN, S/O. KELAKUNJU, AGED 57 YEARS, RESIDING AT NADUVELIL PARAMBU, KALLARA VILLAGE, KALLARA KARA, KALLARA TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.37512 OF 2009 -------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of December 2009 ---------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs. i) Issue appropriate directions directing learned Sub Court, Cherthala and Munsiff Court, Cherthala not to grant any attachment or interim order against the petitioner and against his properties having an extent of 21.45 Ares (53 cents) comprised in Sy.No.22/13/6 and 622/8A1/9, 22/14 and 22/15/5 of Aroor village together with building bearing Door No.7/492D of Aroor panchayat and all other improvements therein without giving prior notice to the petitioner. ii) Issue such other orders as are deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 2. Petitioner is a firm in which respondents 1 and 2 are stated to have been partners earlier. Though they have retired from the firm pursuant to passing of a compromise decree agreeing to execute release deed in favour of the petitioner firm, they are still acting against the interest of the firm and by their influence at the instance of third parties, attachments orders are obtained over the property of the firm despite caveat petitions filed in the Sub Court and Munsiff court Cherthala, is the grievance espoused by the learned counsel for the petitioner firm for W.P.(C).No.37512 OF 2009 Page numbers grant of the reliefs aforementioned. Whatever be the grievance of the petitioner, this court in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India cannot grant the reliefs canvassed, which in effect is a prohibitory caveat from entertaining any application seeking interim relief from anyone in respect of the properties of the petitioner firm. I find the writ petition is not entertainable, and it is closed. Sd/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE vdv