MOHANDAS Vs. SURENDRAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The original petition is filed challenging Ext P4 order passed by the Court of the First Additional Munsiff, Thiruvananthapuram, in IA No.4090/2012 in OS No.1722/2010.

(2.) The concise case of the petitioner, in a nutshell, leading to Ext P4 order, is: he is the plaintiff in the above suit which is filed against the respondents. The third respondent is his wife. The third respondent has also filed OS No.1677/2010 before the same Court, against the respondents 1 and 2. The former suit is filed for a decree of injunction and the latter suit is filed for a decree of mandatory injunction, against the respondents 1 and 2. The respondents 1 and 2 filed a transfer petition under Sec.24 of the Code of Civil Procedure as OP (TP) 215/2011 before the Court of the Principal District Judge,Thiruvananthapuram, to transfer OS No.1677/2010 from the Court of the First Additional Munsiff, Thiruvananthapuram to the Court of the Additional Munsiff-III, Thiruvananthapuram, for the purpose of consolidation and joint trial of the suit with OS No.1722/2010. The District Court by Ext P3 order allowed the transfer petition. Thereafter, the respondents 1 and 2 filed IA 4090/2012 for the joint trial of two suits. The court below, by the impugned Ext P4 order, allowed the application. Ext P4 is erroneous and wrong. Hence, the original petition.

(3.) Heard;Sri.P.Pushparajan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.V Suresh, the counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2. As the third respondent is the wife of the petitioner and the parties are residing in the same address, I dispense with further notice to the third respondent.