DANESH KUMAR Vs. HARIMOHANAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The original petition is filed assailing the order in IA No.3226/2019 in OS No.842/2018 (Ext P5) of the Court of the Additional Munsiff-II, Kozhikode.

(2.) The skeletal facts, relevant for the determination of the original petition, are: the petitioner is the plaintiff in the above suit filed against the respondents, for a decree of perpetual injunction, interalia, to restrain the respondents and their men from trespassing into the plaint "A" and "B" schedule properties. The suit is resisted by the first respondent who has filed Ext P2 written statement. After filing the written statement, the first respondent filed IA No. 3226/2019 (Ext P3) delivering interrogatories on the petitioner. Even though the petitioner filed Ext P4 counter affidavit to Ext P3 application, the court below,by the impugned Ext P5 order, has allowed Ext P3 application. Ext P5 order is erroneous and improper.

(3.) Heard; Sri.Firoz K.M, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Veena Hari, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.