LEKSHMI Vs. LETHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Original Petition is filed by the plaintiff in O.S.No. 461 of 2011 of the Munsif's Court, Adoor, aggrieved by the dismissal of I.A. No. 2249 of 2011, confirmed by the learned Additional District Judge, Pathanamthitta, in C.M.A. No. 41 of 2011. Petitioner filed the suit for a decree for prohibitory injunction against the respondents tress passing into the suit property. She also filed I. A. No. 2249 of 2011 for an order of temporary injunction. Respondents claimed that they were residing in the building of the suit property since long in view of the relationship they had with the husband of petitioner and that petitioner and her men, under guise of the ex parte, ad interim order of injunction she obtained in I.A. No. 2249 of 2011 forcibly evicted them. Both sides produced documents in support of their respective contentions. Learned Munsiff held that petitioner was not able to prove a prima facie case, found more probability for the case pleaded by the respondents and consequently dismissed LA. No. 2249 of 2011.

(2.) Petitioner challenged that order in C.M.A. No. 41 of 2011. Learned Additional District Judge after a reappraisal of the materials on record came to the same conclusion and dismissed C.M.A. No. 41 of 2011. The judgment in C.M.A. No. 41 of 2011 is under challenge.

(3.) Learned counsel for petitioner has contended that the courts below have not adverted to Exts. A1 to A14 in the proper manner. According to the learned counsel, version of respondents as to their alleged relationship with the husband of petitioner is quite unbelievable. It is also argued that a perusal of Ext. C5 would show that the case pleaded by the respondents is not correct. Learned counsel therefore requested this court to interfere with the impugned judgment/order.