High Court of Kerala
Case Law Search
PUSHPA J. SATA, D/O. PRANJEEVAN KANJI v. ASHOK HARISHANKAR, S/O. LATE - FAO No. 167 of 2006  RD-KL 5221 (12 March 2007)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMFAO No. 167 of 2006()
1. PUSHPA J. SATA, D/O. PRANJEEVAN KANJI,
2. DHANALAKSHMI R. PANDYA, D/O. PRANJEEVAN
1. ASHOK HARISHANKAR, S/O. LATE
2. KEERTHI HARISHANKAR, S/O. LATE
For Petitioner :SRI.M.V.AMARESAN
For Respondent :SRI. A. MOHAMED MUSTAQUE(CAVEATOR)
The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
O R D E R
KURIAN JOSEPH & K.T.SANKARAN, JJ.F.A.O.NO. 167 OF 2006 & Caveat O.P.No.447/06 DATED 12th MARCH, 2007.
J U D G M E N T
Kurian Joseph, J.The appellants are the petitioners/plaintiffs in I.A.817/06 in O.S.97/2006 on the file of the Additional Sub Court, Thalassery. Suit is one for partition. According to the appellants, they are entitled to 30/84 shares of the plaint schedule property. The interlocutory application was filed praying for an order of temporary injunction restraining the defendants 2 and 5 or their men from demolishing or removing the house in the plaint schedule property and restraining them from alienating, altering or inducting third parties into the possession of the plaint schedule property and also from executing and taking delivery of plaint schedule property pursuant to the final decree passed in I.A.961/2000 in O.S.163/96 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Kannur. The court below, on an elaborate consideration of the contentions taken by the parties, dismissed the application. FAO NO.167/2006 2
2. On admitting the appeal, in I.A.I925/06, an interim order was passed in terms of the prayer initially for two weeks and the same was being extended from time to time.
3. We heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and the respondents. One of the contentions taken in the appeal itself is that the lower court has not referred to the merits of the case in passing the impugned order. Having extensively heard learned counsel on both sides, we are of the view that it is in the interests of both the parties and in the interests of justice that the interim order passed by this Court in I.A.1925/06 should continue till the disposal of the suit and the suit itself should be disposed of expeditiously. We have consciously refrained from referring to the vehement contentions taken by the parties lest such consideration and any observation thereon should affect the outcome of the suit. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the contentions taken by the parties, we set aside the order under appeal, in I.A.817/06 in O.S.97/06 on the file of the Additional Sub Court, Thalassery with a direction to dispose of the suit itself, within a period of six months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment by either party. The interim order referred to above will FAO NO.167/2006 3 continue till such time. The Appeal is disposed of as above. I.A.No.1925/2006 : Closed
KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE.
KURIAN JOSEPH & K.T.SANKARAN, JJF.A.O.NO.167 OF 2006
J U D G M E N T
DATED 18th JULY, 2006.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.