MUHAMMED ABDUL RAZAKH Vs. PRIYADARSHINI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises from the order passed by the learned Sub Judge, Manjeri on I.A. No. 213 of 2013 in O.S. No. 7 of 1994. As originally filed, it was a suit for prohibitory injunction and partition of the plaint schedule items claiming that the appellants/plaintiffs have right over the property. According to them, 7 items referred to in the plaint schedule were outstanding with the late Pokker and his wife, Biyya on leasehold right as registered lease deed of the year, 1936. That right was transferred to Muhammed Moulavi and on his death, the properties devolved on appellants/respondents 4 to 10 and defendants 1 to 7.

(2.) The respondents 1 to 3/defendants 8 to 10 contended that the plaint schedule items are not identified and that the appellants have made claims with respect to the 7 items referred to in the schedule to the written statement. The respondents 1 to 3 set up independent right and possession over the said 7 items.

(3.) It appears that there was some attempt to mediate the dispute. But, nothing worthwhile transpired. In the meantime evidence was recorded. At that stage, the respondents 1 to 3 filed I.A. No. 215 of 2013 for an order of temporary injunction to restrain the appellants and respondents 4 onwards from trespassing into the written statement schedule items which they claimed is in their exclusive ownership and possession. That application was resisted by the appellants but allowed by the learned Sub Judge as per the impugned order which is under challenge.