IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 26TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 27648 of 2008(N) -------------------------- CMA.10/2007 of PRL.S.C.,THALASSERY OS.105/2007 of MUNSIFF COURT, THALASSERY IA 705/2007 IN O.S.NO.105/07 OF MUNSIFF COURT, THALASSERY) .................... PETITIONER: ------------ RAMLA.T.C., AGED 56 YEARS, D/O.UMMER, R/AT ANDHAR, P.O.POKKUNNU, CALICUT-13. BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN SRI.TOJAN J. VATHIKULAM SRI.K.T.POULOSE (KORATTY) RESPONDENT: ------------- MANITHAP.C.P., AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.GANGADHARAN, R/AT HAREKRISHNA, THIRUVANGAD AMSOM DESOM, THIRUVANGAD P.O., THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. -------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.27648 OF 2008-N ---------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of September, 2008. JUDGMENT The writ petitioner, who is the plaintiff in O.S.No.105/2007 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Thalassery, challenges Exts.P4 and P6 orders passed by the courts below concurrently dismissing her application for temporary injunction. This Court sitting in the rarefied jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India will be loath to interfere with the said concurrent findings. The remedy of the petitioner is to seek trial of the suit and attempt to get a decree in her favour, if she is able to substantiate her contentions. I see no reason to interfere with the orders passed by the courts below. This writ petition is accordingly dismissed. V. RAMKUMAR,JUDGE. cl . 2