The Court issued directions for the District Munsif to dispose of the underlying possession suit within three months, maintain the status quo, and prevent parties from interfering with possession or using police authorities.
Direction to District Munsif to dispose of suit within 3 months, maintain status quo, and forbid interference with possession.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED :24.08.2017
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ
CRP.(PD).No.2854 of 2017 and
CMP.No.13445 of 2017
R.Sanjeev Kumar
..Petitioner
.Vs.
P.Murugesan Pillai ...Respondent
Prayer : Civil Revision Petition filed Under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order and decreetal order in C.M.A 9 of 2016, on the file of Subordinate Court, Pollachi, dated 28.04.2017 in reversing the well considered order in I.A. 467 of 2016, on the file of District Munsif, Pollachi, dated 13.06.2016 in O.S. 145 of 2016, on the file of District Munsif, Pollachi.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Raghavachari
For Respondent : Mr.R.Lakshmi Narasimhan Counsel for Caveator(T/E)
O R D E R
This suit for permanent injunction has been filed by the Revision
Petitioner. Injunction was granted by the trial court, against which an Appeal was filed before the lower Appellate Court, wherein, the
2
injunction order passed was set aside. Aggrieved by the same, the present Revision has been filed.
2.The learned counsel for the caveator would submit that the respondent / defendant is 90 years old. Both the counsel for the parties would submit that an earlier disposal of the suit will satisfy the parties before the trial court.
3.Considering the limited request made by the learned counsel on either side, direction is issued to the District Munsif, Pollachi to dispose of the suit in O.S.No.145 of 2016 within a period of three months by conducting the trial on day to day basis. Both the counsel
would submit that the respective parties to the suit are in possession of the property.
4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the respondent is enjoying the injunction granted by the trial Court and the same was later set aside by the lower Appellate Court.
5.Be that as it may, as on today, both the parties are claiming possession. The learned counsel for the respondent would submit that an application is pending before the trial Court in I.A.No.299 of
3
2017 for rejection of plaint. Therefore, whatever the facts of the case, the status quo granted by the trial Court shall be maintained and both parties are directed not to interfere with the possession as against each other and not to create problems through police, use other forces in respect of suit property till the disposal of the suit. The learned District Munsif is directed to decide the I.A.No.299 of 2017 on merits and thereafter dispose of the suit, but it is made clear that the above exercises should be completed within a period of three months from
the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
9.Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also closed. No
costs.
24.08.2017
kas
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
Note: Issue order copy on 31.10.2017
To
1. The Subordinate Judge, Pollachi 2. The District Munsif, Pollachi.
M.GOVINDARAJ, J.
kas
4
C.R.P.(PD).No.2854 of 2017
and
C.M.P.No.13445 of 2017
24.08.2017
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the trial court in the underlying possession suit must be directed to dispose of the suit within a fixed period.
Whether the status quo of the suit property must be maintained pending disposal.
Whether a direction can be issued to prevent parties from interfering with possession or using police for the subject property.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
R.Sanjeev Kumar
P.Murugesan Pillai
M.GOVINDARAJ
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
