Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

T.ANITHA MENON, D/O.LATE PARUVAKKAT versus INDIRA DEVI, D/O.PARUVAKKAT

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


T.ANITHA MENON, D/O.LATE PARUVAKKAT v. INDIRA DEVI, D/O.PARUVAKKAT - CRP No. 7 of 2005 [2007] RD-KL 8801 (28 May 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

CRP No. 7 of 2005()

1. T.ANITHA MENON, D/O.LATE PARUVAKKAT
... Petitioner

Vs

1. INDIRA DEVI, D/O.PARUVAKKAT
... Respondent

2. AJITH MENON, S/O.PARUVAKKAT

For Petitioner :SRI.VAKKOM N.VIJAYAN

For Respondent :SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)

The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE

Dated :28/05/2007

O R D E R

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J.

.......................................................... C.R.P.No.7 OF 2005 ...........................................................

DATED THIS THE 28TH MAY, 2007

O R D E R

I have heard Sri.Vakkom N.Vijayan, counsel for the petitioner and Sri.G.Sreekumar, counsel for the respondents at length.

2. I have gone through the orders passed by the learned Munsiff and also by the learned Additional District Judge. I am not persuaded to hold that the orders of the courts below granting mandatory injunction pending suit are vitiated by any jurisdictional error. The impugned orders are not liable to be interfered with in revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

3. There is dispute between the parties as to what is the status quo presently obtaining regarding the pathway. While the counsel for the respondents asserts that even now the respondents are able to make use of the pathway for their access, the counsel for the petitioner submits that the very averment in the affidavit in support of the application for mandatory injunction was that the pathway has been rendered unusable. Whatever that be, there will be a direction that as regards the user of the pathway by the plaintiffs, the status quo obtaining as on today will be maintained.

4. I dismiss the C.R.P. However, the learned Munsiff is directed C.R.P.N0.7 OF 2005 to expedite the trial of the suit by special listing the suit in the earliest possible special list, and there will be an observation that the Munsiff will not be unduly influenced by the findings in his own order and also by the judgment of the learned District Judge in the C.M.A. while deciding the suit. No costs.

(PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE)

tgl C.R.P.N0.7 OF 2005


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.