VALSAMMA Vs. JAYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The main prayer in this Original Petition (Civil) filed under the enabling provisions of Article 227 of the Constitution of India is as follows :

(2.) Heard Sri. P.I. Georgekutty, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/plaintiff. In the nature of the orders proposed to be passed in this petition, notice to the respondents will stand dispensed with.

(3.) The petitioner herein is the plaintiff in O.S. No.516/2017 on the file of the Additional Munsiff's Court, Kottayam seeking injunction to restrain the defendant therein from entering into the plaint schedule property and from committing waste therein etc. The respondent herein is the defendant in the said Suit. The respondent happens to be none other than the plaintiff's son who is aged about 67 years. It is stated that the respondent is living abroad with his family and at his request the petitioner has consented to settle half of the property owned by her in favour of the respondent. On 23.07.2013 the petitioner executed the settlement deed prepared by the respondent on the belief that the extent of the property is half of the entire property owned by her and she continued to reside in the building in the said property. When the respondent son returned after vacation, the petitioner required a copy of the deed so as to execute a will in favour of the second son. When the respondent took an antagonic stand stating that the entire property is settled in his favour and he is prepared to sell the property, that resulted in quarrel between the petitioner/plaintiff and respondent/defendant and he had manhandled the petitioner and pushed her out. Thereupon the petitioner had filed the present Suit, O.S. No. 516/2017 seeking injunction and the court below had granted ad interim injunction. A Commissioner was appointed in the Suit and found that the household articles were in daily use by the petitioner, as she had been residing there. Due to the threat caused by the respondent, the petitioner was constrained to stay with her brother and also with her second son who is staying with his in-laws. When the petitioner returned to her property, it was seen that the residential building was locked, then the petitioner filed a petition seeking police assistance to open the lock, with the help of a person like iron-smith. The court below has dismissed Ext.P6 application, I.A. No. 3942/2017 as per the impugned Ext.P7 order dated 22.11.2017. The impugned Ext.P7 order reads as follows :