Shajan Antony @ Rapheal @ Shajan C.A Vs C.A. Shylan

1

O.P.(C) NO.858 OF 2025

¶3

2025:KER:27528

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

¶7

TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 11TH CHAITHRA, 1947

¶8

O.P.(C) NO.858 OF 2025

¶9

(AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OS NO.281 OF 2025
OF II ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM)

¶10

PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT:

¶11

SHAJAN ANTONY @ RAPHEAL @ SHAJAN C.A, AGED 58 YEARS,
S/O. ANTONY CHAMMANIKODATH, PAP ROAD, PUTHIYA ROAD,
THAMMANAM P.O., EDAPPALLY SOUTH VILLAGE,
KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682 032

¶12

BY ADVS.
SUSANTH SHAJI
SIDHARTH O.
ALBIN A. JOSEPH
NEKHA VARGHESE

¶13

RESPONDENT/APPLICANT/PLAINTIFF:

¶14

C.A. SHYLAN, AGED 54 YEARS,
WARD NO:32/304A, CHAMMANIKODATH, PALARIVATTOM P.O.,
EDAPPALLY SOUTH VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682 032

¶15

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.3.2025, THE COURT
ON 01.04.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

2

¶17

O.P.(C) NO.858 OF 2025

¶18

2025:KER:27528

¶19

JUDGMENT (Dated: 1^st April, 2025)

¶20

This original petition is filed for a direction to the 2^nd Additional Munsiff Court, Ernakulam, to consider and dispose of Ext.P2 injunction application on merits within a time frame and to dispose of Ext.P12, filed to vacate the interim order.

¶21

The petitioner is the defendant in O.S.No.281 of 2024 filed by the respondent for a permanent prohibitory injunction restraining

¶22

the petitioner herein and his agents from obstructing him while constructing a gate across the plaint schedule pathway after leaving 3

¶23

meters distance from the eastern end of the said pathway to the west. An injunction application was filed along with the suit as I.A.No.2 of 2025, and the learned Munsiff has passed Ext.P2 temporary injunction. The petitioner has filed Ext.P12 application on 24.03.2025,

¶24

to vacate the interim order granted by the Munsiff dated 17.03.2025.

¶25

The petitioner seeks disposal of the same.

¶26

3

¶27

O.P.(C) NO.858 OF 2025

¶28

2025:KER:27528 3. A report was called for and the report dated 29.03.2025 received, wherein it is stated that O.S.281 of 2025 is a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the plaintiff from obstructing the defendant herein from putting up a gate on the eastern compound wall of the property of the defendant to enjoy a pathway situated on eastern side of his property and further from causing obstruction for his enjoyment of the said pathway wherein he claims right of easement by grant. After hearing both sides, an ad interim injunction was granted on 29.03.2025 and I.A.No.2 of 2025 was posted to 29.3.2025 for objection and hearing. The defendant thereafter filed I.A.No.3 of 2025, to advance the matter for hearing of I.A.No.2 of 2025 from 29.03.2025, for considering I.A.No.4 of 2025 filed for vacating the interim injunction and for considering the injunction application on merits. The suit was advanced to 27.03.2025. On 27.03.2025, the counsel for the defendant was heard on I.A.No.4 of 2025 and is posted for objection and for further hearing to

¶29

4

¶30

O.P.(C) NO.858 OF 2025

¶31

2025:KER:27528 04.04.2025. There was no representation for the petitioner while I.A. No.4 of 2025 was considered on 27.03.2025. Now, I.A.No.2 of 2025 and 4 of 2025 are posted to 04.04.2025, for hearing and objection.

¶32

The injunction order granted is not to obstruct the construction of the gate across the plaint schedule pathway, and Ext.P12 is an application to vacate the interim order stating that the gate put up on the way to access his property, will be closed.

¶33

Taking into consideration the report as well as the urgency put forward in Ext.P12, I direct the Trial court to take up I.A.Nos.2 of 2025 and 4 of 2025 and dispose of the same before the court closes for summer vacation. The status quo as ordered by this court shall continue till the disposal of both the I.As.

¶34

This original petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

BASANT BALAJI, JUDGE

ss

5

O.P.(C) NO.858 OF 2025

¶40

2025:KER:27528

¶41

APPENDIX OF OP(C)858/2025

¶42

`PETITIO`	`NER EXHIBI`	`TS`
`Exhibit`	`P1`	`TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT DATED 17.03.2025 IN O.S.` `NO. 281/2025 ON THE FILES OF MUNSIFF COURT,` `ERNAKULAM`
`Exhibit`	`P2`	`TRUE` `COPY` `OF` `INJUNCTION` `APPLICATION` `DATED` `17.03.2025 IN I.A. NO. 2/2025 IN O.S. NO. 281/2025` `ON THE FILES OF MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM`
`Exhibit`	`P3`	`TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17.03.2025 IN I.A.` `NO. 2/2025 IN O.S. NO. 281/2025 ON THE FILES OF` `MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM`
`Exhibit`	`P4`	`TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 12.09.2012 IN O.S.` `NO. 759/2011 ON THE FILES OF MUNSIFF COURT,` `ERNAKULAM`
`Exhibit`	`P5`	`TRUE COPY OF THE DECREE DATED 12.09.2012 IN IN O.S.` `NO. 759/2011 ON THE FILES OF MUNSIFF COURT,` `ERNAKULAM`
`Exhibit`	`P6`	`TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED 20.03.2015` `IN A.S. NO. 96/2012 AND A.S. NO. 14/2013 ON THE` `FILES OF SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM`
`Exhibit`	`P7`	`TRUE COPY OF THE DECREE DATED 20.03.2015 IN A.S.` `NO. 96/2012 ON THE FILES OF SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM`
`Exhibit`	`P8`	`TRUE COPY OF THE ROUGH SKETCH DATED NIL WITH` `RESPECT TO THE PLAINT SCHEDULE PROPERTIES`
`Exhibit`	`P9`	`TRUE` `COPY` `OF` `THE` `EXECUTION` `PETITION` `DATED` `20.01.2025 IN E.P. NO. 98/2025 ON THE FILES OF` `HON’BLE MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM`
`Exhibit`	`P10`	`TRUE` `COPY` `OF` `THE` `COUNTER` `AFFIDAVIT` `DATED` `24.03.2025 IN I.A. NO. 2/2025 IN O.S. NO. 281/2025` `ON THE FILES OF MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM`
`Exhibit`	`P11`	`TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF DOCUMENTS DATED 24.03.2025` `IN I.A. NO. 2/2025 IN O.S. NO. 281/2025 ON THE` `FILES OF MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM`

¶43

6

¶44

O.P.(C) NO.858 OF 2025

¶45

2025:KER:27528
Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 24.03.2025 IN
I.A. NO. 4/2025 IN I.A. NO. 2/2025 IN O.S. NO.
281/2025 ON THE FILES OF MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM

¶46

Exhibit P13 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 24.03.2025
IN I.A. NO. 3/2025 IN I.A. NO. 2/2025 IN O.S. NO.
281/2025 ON THE FILES OF MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM

Shajan Antony @ Rapheal @ Shajan C.A v. C.A. Shylan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shajan Antony @ Rapheal @ Shajan C.A v. C.A. Shylan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sreedevi Vs Sreelatha G.S

Ajosh P.B Vs Sreekumar

Reghuthaman Vs Mary John

Sanooja Vs Hussain

Thomas Devasia Vs Rosamma Abraham

Project Manager, Adani Vizhinjam Port Pvt. Ltd., Vs Sajad. a.