M.C.Mathai,S/O Xavier vs Sherly Sheena

N. Anil Kumar, J

Heard the learned counsel for the appellants.

This Regular Second Appeal is admitted on the following substantial questions of law.

(1) Whether the plaintiffs/appellants 1 and 2, husband and wife aged 74 and 72 respectively are entitled to have a legal right for residence in the plaint

schedule property, subsequent to the death of their son late Xavier ?

(2) Whether the respondent who is the wife of late Xavier is entitled to obstruct the residence of plaintiffs/appellants during the fag end of their life on

the strength of Ext.A1 document?

Issue notice. I.A.No.2/2021

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners /appellants.

The petitioners/appellants are husband and wife aged 74 and 72 years respectively. The respondent is none other than their daughter-in-law. The

respondent's husband Mr.Xavier passed away. Subsequent to the death of Xavier, the respondent claimed right over the property and the building

scheduled in the plaint on the strength of Ext.A1 document and made attempt to evict the petitioners/appellants from the plaint schedule property and

the building therein.

The learned counsel for the petitioners/appellants submits that the petitioners have no other building of their own to reside during the fag end of their

life.

Considering the submission made, it is just and proper to grant a temporary prohibitory injunction restraining the respondent/defendant from evicting

the petitioners/appellants from the plaint schedule property or causing any disturbance to them for a period of three months. On a query made by this

Court, the learned counsel for the petitioners/appellants submits that the appellants have no intention to evict the respondent or her children from the

plaint schedule property or the building thereon. The submission is recorded. It is clarified that the temporary injunction granted shall not be used as a

tool to evict the respondent or her children from the plaint schedule building.