The main legal point established is the requirement for providing reasons for decisions, as it is essential for clarity and fairness in the judicial process.

JUDGMENT :

S.Manikumar, J.

Being aggrieved by the interim order dated 15.3.2021 in W.P. (C)No.22383 of 2020, instant writ appeal is filed. Short order impugned in this appeal is reproduced:

"I have heard Sri.Raju K. Mathews, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.22383 of 2020, Sri.S.Sujin, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.(c) No.26461 of 2020 as well as Sri.Jaffar, the learned Government Pleader.

2. From the submissions advanced, it appears that the property comprised in Sy.No.19/1 in Kattapana Village having an extent of 4 cents was mortgaged with the ING Vysya Bank. The specific contention of the learned Government Pleader is that the property over which the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.22383 of 2020 claim possession is the property which was mortgaged with the bank. However, the petitioners have not chosen to implead the ING Vysya Bank as a respondent. I am of the considered opinion that for an effective adjudication of the disputes involved, the ING Vysya Bank is also a necessary party.

In view of the above, the "ING Vysya Bank, Shema Building, M.G.Road, Ravipuram, Ernakulam - 682 016 represented by its Chief Manager" is suo motu impleaded as an additional respondent.

Registry to carry out the amendment to the cause title.

Issue urgent notice by speed post to the additional respondent.

The status quo granted on 9.2.2021 will stand vacated.

Post after ten days."

2. Facts leading to the filing of the writ appeal are as hereunder:

Father of the 1st petitioner/1st appellant took on lease, as per Exhibit P2 lease deed, an extent of 4 cents (1.61 Ares) together with the building thereon and permitted the petitioners/appellants to start business. Later the property was purchased under Exhibit P3 unregistered sale deed and the building was reconstructed on the strength of Exhibit P4 exemption granted by the Government and Exhibit P5 series permit issued by Kattappana Panchayat. Father of the 1st appellant permitted him to start a business in the newly constructed building. Accordingly, the appellants have been doing business in the building in the name and style of 'Kavumkal Silks'.

While so, the 5th respondent, who is the brother of the 1st appellant, staked claim over the property on the strength of a settlement deed, said to have been executed by their mother and a Thandapper account based on it. The Thandapper account and the Patta on which it was based, are fabricated by the 5th respondent in collusion with some revenue officials. The 1st appellant therefore submitted a complaint to the District Collector, Idukki/2nd respondent seeking cancellation of the Thandapper account in the name of the 5th respondent. The District Collector, Idukki District, 2nd respondent, passed Exhibit P6 order ordering cancellation of the Thandapper and further stating that the fabrication of documents was done with the knowledge of the 1st appellant and therefore, ordering eviction of the appellants from the property within 15 days. The Tahsildar, Idukki Taluk/3rd respondent has informed the appellants that if they do not vacate the property before 21.10.2020, they would be forcibly evicted.

Therefore, writ petition was filed and an interim order was passed on 27.10.2020 directing the parties to maintain status quo. Respondents filed counter affidavit admitting that the right of the appellants to get assignment of the land has to be considered under the Special Rules 1993 and the same could not be done since there was no Town Survey system and further contended that the forgery of the Patta was done by the 5th respondent, with the knowledge of the appellants. The learned single Judge passed an interim order vacating the status quo and directed to implead ING Vysya Bank as additional 6th respondent in the writ petition. But no specific reasons are mentioned in the interim order for vacating the status quo. Being aggrieved, instant writ appeal is filed.

3. On the basis of the memorandum of grounds, Mr.Grashious Kuria