IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH APRIL 2008 / 19TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 11947 of 2008(V) ------------------------------------- OS.205/2003 OF MUNSIFF COURT, TIRUR ............................................... PETITIONER: ----------------- REJI, S/O.CHUNGATH KOCHUNNI, AGED 42 YEARS, KUTTIPPURAM (PO), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.CHANDRASEKHAR RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- PAPPINISSERY SAIDALI, S/O.SAIDU, AGED 50 YEARS, KATTIPPARUTHI (PO) PARASSANUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/04/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.C. NO. 11947 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 8th day of April, 2008. J U D G M E N T This writ petition is preferred against the order of the Munsiff, Tirur in I.A.197/08 in O.S.205/03 whereby the learned Munsiff stayed the said suit under the provisions of Section 10 of CPC till the disposal of A.S.104/02 pending before the Sub Court, Tirur. A perusal of the judgment in the earlier suit against which an appeal is preferred would show that it is only a suit for injunction which has been negatived by the Court below. The present plaintiff in O.S.205/03 is the defendant in that suit. Subsequently the defendant in that suit, namely, the present writ petitioner has filed a suit for recovery of possession on the strength of title. I am afraid that the Court below has not considered the matter in the proper perspective for the reason that in a suit for recovery of possession on the strength of title or on other grounds, consideration of the entire materials is totally W.P.C 11947 OF 2008 -:2:- different from a suit for injunction where the Court is only concerned with the possession of the property by the person. Therefore even if the suit is stayed the result of the appeal may not have any conclusive or binding effect on the other for the reason that larger question arises therein. Therefore I set aside the order passed by the Court below and direct the Court below to consider the matter afresh after hearing both sides and then dispose of the matter in accordance with law. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-