JUDGMENT

Navaniti Prasad Singh, C.J.

By this writ petition the petitioner challenges Exts.P4 and P6 being orders passed by the Upa Lok Ayukta in complaint No.877/2016 (D). It may be noted that the said complaint was filed by the writ petitioner herself.

2. We have heard learned counsel appearing for 5th respondent who is the sole private contesting respondent, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as learned Government Pleader and with their consent, we are disposing of this matter at this stage itself.

3. It appears that the father of the writ petitioner and 5th respondent left behind certain properties, part of which was given to one or the other family member and part of it was allegedly intended to be kept in the state of joint owners. Amongst co-sharers, there were some disputes which lead to the institution of O.S. No.2199/2015 before the Munsiff's Court, Thiruvananthapuram by 5th respondent in which the petitioner is a defendant. In the Suit the plaintiff had obtained an injunction restraining the defendant, i.e. the writ petitioner, from changing the nature of the property in any manner.

4. It appears some time thereafter the writ petitioner alleged that on the b