APPU Vs. PRABHAKARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is the Plaintiff in O.S. No. 446/07 on the file of the Sub Court, Irinjalakuda. The suit was filed for declaration of title and consequential injunction. The suit was dismissed on 10/2/2011. It is submitted by the Petitioner that the Advocate Commissioner, who visited the property, reported that that the suit property is lying as a single plot. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is residing in the plaint schedule property. According to him, the trial court on wrong appreciation of facts and evidence dismissed the suit. He also submits that there is every likelihood of the appeal being allowed and the decree and judgment passed by the trial court being set aside. The Petitioner apprehends that consequent on the dismissal of the suit the Respondent will take law into his hands and that there is a possibility of dispossessing the Petitioner from the suit property in the coming days.

(2.) The Petitioner filed an application for copy of the decree and judgment and the same are pending consideration before the court below. On 11/2/2011 he filed an IA. No. 639/11 for an interim injunction restraining the Respondent from trespassing into the plaint schedule property, till a copy of the judgment and decree is obtained. The learned Sub Judge dismissed the application. Ext.P5 is the order, which is under challenge. Ext.P5 order shows that the learned Sub Judge has not considered the facts and circumstance averred in I.A.639/11 and dismissed the IA by passing a cryptic order. The Petitioner submits that he expects that the trial court will issue copy of the decree and judgment within a few days and that he proposed to file an appeal immediately on receipt of the same. He further submits that if any untoward incident happened before filing of the appeal and before consideration of the application for interim injunction, the same will cause serious hardship to him. In these circumstances, the Petitioner approached this Court for the relief, which is temporary in nature. Since the relief sought for is temporary, this Court is of the view that the original petition can be disposed of without issuing notice to the Respondent.

(3.) In the circumstances, the original petition is disposed of with a direction to the parties to the suit to maintain status quo as on the date of the decree and judgment in OS. No. 446/07 on the file of the Sub Court, Irinjalakuda for a period of ten days.