SUDARSANA PILLAI Vs. THULASEEDHARAN NAIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Which is the appropriate forum to move an application alleging violation of injunction under R.2A of Order XXXIX of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'CPC' only)? The issue arises on a reference made by the learned Single Judge noticing a conflict between Dinesh Vs. Pioneer Shopping Complex (P) Ltd., 2002 KHC 7 and Indiradevi Vs. Prasannan, 2009 KHC 260 .

(2.) The plaintiffs sought an order of temporary injunction in I. A. No. 333/2016 restraining the defendants from altering the traditional route of the temple procession (Parakku Ezhunnullathu) pending disposal of O. S. No. 51/2014. The Trial Court dismissed the application for temporary injunction whereas the lower Appellate Court in C. M. A. No. 31/2014 allowed the same. This Court in O. P. (Civil) No. 232/2016 filed by the defendants set aside the judgment of the lower Appellate Court and modified the interim arrangement to be maintained pending suit. The operative portion of the judgment is as follows:

(3.) The plaintiffs thereafter filed I. A. No. 333/2016 alleging violation of injunction under R.2A of Order XXXIX of the Code of Civil Procedure to which the defendants have filed a counter affidavit and the Trial Court is in seizin of the matter. The defendants in the meanwhile have filed the present original petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India questioning the maintainability of I. A. No. 333/2016. It is the case of the defendants that an application of that nature would lie only to this Court since what is complained of is the violation of the judgment in O. P. (Civil) No. 232/2016. The learned Single Judge before whom the original petition came up for hearing felt that an authoritative pronouncement on the issue is warranted in the circumstances.