SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 43322

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Murali Purushothaman, J
THOMAS – Appellant
Versus
ANILKUMAR – Respondent
OP(C) NO. 2314 OF 2022



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI. M.S.UNNIKRISHNAN, SRI. K.SUNIL, SMT. ALEENA MARIA JOSE, SMT. M.ARDRA KRISHNAN, SMT. KRISHNENDU.D
For the Respondents: SRI. A.ANTONY, SMT. LEELAMMA ANTONY, SRI. M.V.JACOB (MANICKANAMPARAMPIL)

The court emphasized maintaining status quo in property disputes until resolution of the underlying suit, without addressing the merits of prior injunction orders.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 227 - Original petition against order of Additional District Judge - Plaintiffs sought permanent prohibitory injunction against defendants for trespassing - Initial application for temporary injunction dismissed, later allowed by District Judge - Petitioners challenged this order under Article 227. (Paras 2, 4)

(B) Status Quo - Court directed parties to maintain status quo regarding property till disposal of the suit, emphasizing expeditious trial. (Para 4)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners, defendants in an original suit, were restrained from trespassing into property by an interim injunction granted by the District Judge after the initial dismissal of the plaintiffs' application.

Findings of Court:
The court disposed of the original petition without delving into the merits of the previous orders, maintaining status quo until the suit's resolution.

Issues: The main issue was whether the interim injunction should be maintained pending trial.

Ratio Decidendi: The court refrained from addressing the merits of the injunction orders but mandated that the status quo be preserved until the trial court resolves the matter.

Result: Original petition disposed of, maintaining status quo.

Table of Content
1. original petition filed against injunction order. (Para 2)
2. status quo maintained pending trial. (Para 3)

JUDGMENT

This original petition is filed against the order dated 22.07.2022 in C.M.A No.69 of 2020 on the files of the Additional District Judge - VII, Ernakulam.

2. The petitioners are the defendants in OS No.555 of 2020 on the files of the 1st Additional Munsiff Court, Ernakulam filed by the respondents herein for permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the petitioners from trespassing into the plaint ‘C’ schedule property. By Ext.P7 order, the interlocutory application (I.A No.1 of 2020) of the plaintiffs for temporary injunction from trespassing into the plaint ‘C’ schedule property was dismissed by the learned Munsiff. Against Ext.P7 order, the plaintiffs/respondents filed C.M.A No.69 of 2020 and the learned District Judge, by Ext.P9 order, set aside Ext.P7 and allowed I.A No.1 of 2020 and restrained the petitioners by an interim prohibitory injunction from trespassing into the plaint ‘C’ schedule property till the disposal of the suit. Challenging Ext.P9 order, this original petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

3. This Court, by order dated 13.12.2022, directed the parties to maintain stats quo in respect of the plaint ‘C’ schedule property as on the said date till the date of next posting. The interim order was being extended from time to time till 21.01.2023. 4. When the original petition came up for consideration today, it is submitted by the learned counsel on both sides that the original suit is listed for trial on 06.08.2025 and that the trial court may be directed to dispose of the suit expeditiously maintaining the order of status quo passed on 13.12.2022 and untrammeled by the observations and findings in Exts.P7 and P9 orders.

In the light of the said submission, this original petition is disposed of without going into the merits of Exts.P7 and P9 and leaving open the contentions of the parties. The parties shall maintain status quo as ordered by this Court on 13.12.2022 till the disposal of the suit. Since the suit is of the year 2020, the trial court is requested to dispose of the same in accordance with law, expeditiously.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top