Kanchana vs Devaki

Harun-Ul-Rashid, J.—The Appellant filed the suit for declaration of prescriptive easement right of way and for consequential injunction. The trial court dismissed the suit. The Appellant preferred A.S. No. 93 of 2010 before the Sub Court, Cherthala and the same is pending. The learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted that throughout the pendency of the suit an order of injunction was in force. Therefore, the Appellant prays for an injunction restraining the Respondents from obstructing the user of the pathway till the disposal of the appeal. The dispute is regarding the user of item No. II pathway. The injunction order passed by the trial court was maintained during the pendency of the suit. The lower appellate court dismissed the application for injunction by the order under challenge.

I do not propose to go into the respective contentions of the parties in this appeal. An early disposal of the appeal will serve the ends of justice. Accordingly, a direction is issued to the Sub Court, Cherthala, to hear and dispose of the appeal, in accordance with law, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The parties are directed to maintain status quo as on today till the disposal of the appeal.

The appeal is disposed of as above. No order as to costs.