Dismissed

Sarojini Amma K.S. v. Seema Nasimudeen

Kerala HC7 Apr 2022OP(C)/704/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed an ex-parte interim injunction restraining landlords from obstructing a tenant. It directed that future constructions be subject to the final order and ordered expeditious disposal of the challenge with a fair hearing.

What did the court decide?

Directed that future constructions/alterations by the tenant shall be subject to the result of the final order in I.A.1/2022; directed expeditious disposal with fair hearing within one month.

Sarojini Amma K.S. Vs Seema Nasimudeen — Landlord and Tenant | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. BABU

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 7^TH DAY OF APRIL 2022 / 17TH CHAITHRA, 1944

¶5

OP(C) NO. 704 OF 2022

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER IN IA 1/2022 IN C.M.A.13/2022 OF ADDITIONAL

¶7

DISTRICT COURT NORTH PARAVUR

¶8

PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4:

¶9

1 SAROJINI AMMA K.S, AGED 71 YEARS, W/O. P.K. SIVADASA PILLAI, BROTHERS BUILDING, OPP. ST. XAVIER'S COLLEGE, PALACE ROAD, ALUVA, PIN - 683101 2 MURALEEDHARAN, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O. LATE P.K. SIVADASA PILLAI, RESIDING AT BROTHERS BUILDING, OPP. ST. XAVIER'S COLLEGE, PALACE ROAD, ALUVA, PIN - 683101 3 Mrs.MAYA DEVI, AGED 52 YEARS, D/O. LATE P.K. SIVADASA PILLAI, RESIDING AT BROTHERS BUILDING, OPP. ST. XAVIER'S COLLEGE, PALACE ROAD, ALUVA, PIN - 683101 4 Mrs.MANJULA DEVI, AGED 49 YEARS, D/O. LATE P.K. SIVADASA PILLAI, RESIDING AT BROTHERS BUILDING, OPP. ST. XAVIER'S COLLEGE, PALACE ROAD, ALUVA, PIN - 683101 BY ADV BIJU ABRAHAM

¶10

RESPONDENTS/APPELLANT AND 5TH RESPONDENT:

¶11

1 SEEMA NASIMUDEEN, AGED 48 YEARS, W/O. NASIMUDEEN, AGED 48 YEARS, VALIYAPARAMBIL, METHANAM KARA, ALANGAD VILLAGE, PARAVUR TALUK PRESENTLY HAVING SHOP ROOM ADDRESS AS SPLASH, 10/34 (OLD NO. VII/404), BROTHERS BUILDING, OPP. ST. XAVIER'S COLLEGE, PALACE ROAD, ALUVA, PIN - 683101 2 MR. SUDHEER, AGED 55 YEARS, C/O. SAROJINI AMMA K.S., W/O. P.K. SIVADASA PILLAI, AGED 71 YEARS, BROTHERS BUILDING, OPP. ST. XAVIER'S COLLEGE, PALACE ROAD, ALUVA., PIN - 683101

¶12

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.04.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

O.P(C) No.704 of 2022

¶14

¶15

K.BABU, J .

¶16

O.P(C) No.704 of 2022

¶17

Dated this the 7^th day of April, 2022

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

The prayers in this Original Petition filed under Article 227 of

¶20

the Constitution of India are as follows:

¶21

“(i) An order setting aside the order dated 01.04.2022 in IA No.1/2022 in CMA No.13/2022 on the files of the Additional District Court, North Paravur (Exhibit P9) by holding that the granting of such an injunction is illegal before finally deciding the appeal.

¶22

(ii) Any other appropriate order or direction as this Hon’ble Court deem fit and proper on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and allow this original petition with cost, for the ends of justice.”

¶23

The petitioners challenge the order dated 01.04.2022 in

¶24

I.A.No.1/2022 in C.M.A.No.13/2022 on the file of the Additional

¶25

District Court, North Paravur in this Original Petition.

¶26

The petitioners are the landlords of a building bearing

¶27

Door No.10/34 of Aluva Municipality. Respondent No.1 is the tenant

¶28

of that building.

¶29

During the continuance of the tenancy, respondent No.1

¶30

O.P(C) No.704 of 2022

¶31

¶32

obtained possession of another building adjacent to the building owned by the petitioners. Thereafter, respondent No.1 destroyed the western wall of the building and attempted to convert the two rooms as a single one. The petitioners resisted the attempt of respondent No.1. The petitioners filed O.S.No.43/2022 before the Munsiff’s Court, Aluva to restrain respondent No.1 from making any alteration in the building. The Court granted an interim injunction in favour of the petitioners restraining respondent No.1 from making any alteration or construction till the disposal of the suit.

¶33

Respondent No.1 filed O.S.No.71/2022 against the petitioners praying for a permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the petitioners from causing any inconvenience to the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the building. Respondent No.1 also filed an application for restraining the petitioners from preventing the respondents covering the front portion of the building bearing No.10/34 with glass. No interim relief was granted by the Munsiff’s Court in the said application.

¶34

O.P(C) No.704 of 2022

¶35

¶36

Both the applications were considered together by the Munsiff’s Court and a common order was passed on 04.03.2022, whereby the application seeking interim injunction preferred on the part of respondent No.1 was dismissed. The application filed by the petitioners as I.A.No.1/2022 in O.S.No.43/2022 was allowed, restraining respondent No.1 and her agents by a temporary injunction from making any kind of construction in the property and using the property as a way for the entrance to the neighbouring property till the disposal of the suit.

¶37

Respondent No.1 challenged the order dated 04.03.2022 in I.A.No.1/2022 in O.S.No.43/2022 before the Additional District Court, North Paravur by filing C.M.A.No.13/2022. The Additional District Court admitted the appeal and passed an ex-parte order of interim injunction in favour of respondent No.1 restraining the petitioners, their men and the agents from obstructing or causing any inconvenience or hindrance to the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the tenanted premises by respondent No.1 and causing any hindrance or inconvenience to her from covering the front portion of the building bearing No.10/34 (Ext.P9). This order

¶38

O.P(C) No.704 of 2022

¶39

¶40

is under challenge in this Original Petition.

¶41

On 06.04.2022, this Court issued notice to the respondents by Special Messenger returnable by this day (07.04.2022). It is reported that notice could not be served on the respondents as they are out of station.

¶42

Heard Sri.Biju Abraham, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners.

¶43

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the Additional District Court went wrong in granting the ad-interim order as granted in Ext.P9 in such a way as to render the entire proceedings infructuous. It is submitted the interim relief granted as per Ext.P9 order is virtually the main relief sought in the original suit.

¶44

The order under challenge is an ex-parte order of temporary injunction. The petitioners have a remedy to approach the Additional District Court to challenge the impugned order by filing counter and to press for hearing the interlocutory application on merits.

¶45

O.P(C) No.704 of 2022

¶46

¶47

The learned counsel for the petitioners prayed for

¶48

passing an order to the effect that any construction or alteration made after Ext.P6 order in the building bearing Door No.10/34 shall be subject to the result of the final order to be passed in the interlocutory application.

¶49

This Court is of the view that the petitioners are entitled to such a relief. Therefore, it is ordered that any construction or alteration made after Ext.P6 order in the building bearing Door No.10/34 shall be subject to the result of the final order to be passed in I.A.No.1/2022 in C.M.A.No.13/2022. The Court below shall expeditiously dispose of I.A.No.1/2022, after affording sufficient opportunities to the petitioners to agitate their contentions, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date on which the Court re-opens after summer vacation.

¶50

The Original Petition is disposed of as above.

¶51

Sd/K.BABU, JUDGE

¶52

KAS

¶53

O.P(C) No.704 of 2022

¶54

¶55

APPENDIX OF OP(C) 704/2022

¶56

PETITIO	NER EXH	IBITS
Exhibit	P1	A TRUE COPY OF THE PLIANT IN O.S. NO. 43/2022 ON THE FILES OF MUNSIFF COURT ALUVA
Exhibit	P2	A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR INJUNCTION FILED AS I.A. NO. 1/2022 IN O.S. NO. 43/2022 ON THE FILES OF MUNSIFF COURT ALUVA
Exhibit	P3	A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER OF INJUNCTION DATED 25-01-2022 IN I.A. NO. 1/2022 IN O.S. NO. 43/2022 ON THE FILES OF MUNSIFF COURT ALUVA
Exhibit	P4	A TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S. NO. 71/2022 ON THE FILES OF MUNSIFF COURT ALUVA
Exhibit	P5	A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR INJUNCTION FILED AS I.A. NO. 1/2022 IN O.S. NO. 71/2022 ON THE FILES OF MUNSIFF COURT ALUVA
Exhibit	P6	A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER IN I.A. NO. 1/2022 IN O.S. NO. 43/2022 & I.A.
		NO. 1/2022 IN O.S. NO. 71/2022 ON THE FILES OF MUNSIFF COURT ALUVA DATED 04- 03-2022
Exhibit	P7	A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL IN C.M.A. 13/2022 ON THE FILES OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT NORTH PARAVUR
Exhibit	P8	A TRUE COPY OF THE INJUNCTION APPLICATION FILED AS I.A. 1/2022 IN C.M.A. 13/2022 ON THE FILES OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT NORTH PARAVUR
Exhibit	P9	A TRUE COPY OF THE INJUNCTION ORDER DATED 01-04-2022 IN I.A. NO. 1/2022 IN C.M.A. 13/2022 ON THE FILES OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT NORTH PARAVUR

Sarojini Amma K.S. v. Seema Nasimudeen

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarojini Amma K.S. v. Seema Nasimudeen

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shaji K.H Vs T. J. Thomas

Reena Mathew Vs Nil

Padmakumari Vs N.Venugopal

Bijulal Vs Prakkulam Shri Gosthala Kavu Devi Kshethra Bharana Samithi Office

Deepa Vs K.M. Salomi

Radhkrishnan Vs Leelavathy