O R D E R

The plaintiff in the suit, who is the appellant/review petitioner herein, whose appeal has been dismissed by my learned predecessor-in-office, has come up before this Court for review of judgment dated 21.06.2013 in S.A.

No.562 of 2001.

2. The suit is one for injunction simpliciter. The suit was initially decreed by the trial court. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree, the defendant preferred A.S.No.71/1994 before the Subordinate Judge's Court, Payyanur. The said appeal was allowed and the judgment and decree passed by the trial court were reversed. Thereafter, the review petitioner herein has come up in second appeal.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the review petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent.

4. The main grievance advanced by the learned counsel for the review petitioner is that the suit, being one for injunction simpliciter, did not call for any adjudication on the question of title, and even then both the courts below and this Court had unnecessarily gone into the question of title.

5. The next grievance expressed by the learned counsel for the review petitioner is that, when Ext.A6 purchase certificate was pressed into service along with Ext.A1 by t