The High Court observed that deferring the disposal of interlocutory applications pending the Commissioner's report is correct. It held the suit must be disposed within nine months of the report filing.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD
WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JULY 2017/28TH ASHADHA, 1939
OP(C).No. 1457 of 2017 (O)
OS 98/2017 of MUNSIFF'S COURT, NORTH PARAVUR
PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF:
MISSIONARY CONGREGATION OF THE BLESSED SACRAMENT (MCBS) KARUKUNNU,KARUMALOOR VILLAGE, PARAVOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROVINCIAL COUNCILLOR FR.THOMAS JACOB
BY ADVS.DR.V.N.SANKARJEE
SRI.V.N.MADHUSUDANAN SRI.M.K.SIDHAN SMT.R.UDAYA JYOTHI SRI.M.M.VINOD SMT.M.SUSEELA
RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS:
OP(C).No. 1457 of 2017 (O)
2
OP(C).No. 1457 of 2017 (O)
3
R1 TO R20 & 25 BY ADV. SRI.RAJIV NAMBISAN
R23 BY ADVS. SRI.JOHN JOSEPH VETTIKAD
SRI.C.JOSEPH JOHNY
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19-07-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP(C).No. 1457 of 2017 (O)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.NO.98/2017 OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, NORTH PARUR
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 10/3/2017 SUBMITTED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSION IN I.A.NO 500/2017 IN EXHIBIT P1 SUIT
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION I.A.NO.501/2017 IN EXHIBIT P1 SUIT
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION I.A.NO.502/2017 IN EXHIBIT P1 SUIT
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 26TH RESPONDENT IN EXHIBIT P-3 APPLICATION
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPYOF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 26TH RESPONDENT IN EXHIBIT P-4 APPLICATION.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
EXT.R23(A) TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION IN IA NO.857/2017 FILED BY THE 26TH DEFENDANT
EXT.R23(B) TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN IA NO.857/2017
EXT.R23(C) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 3.4.2017 OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, NORTH PARAVOOR IN IA NO.857/2017
EXT.R23(D) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 3.4.2017 OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, NORTH PARAVOOR IN IA NO.501/2017
//TRUE COPY//
A.HARIPRASAD, J.
O.P.(C) No.1457 of 2017
Dated this the 19th day of July, 2017
JUDGMENT
Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following
reliefs:
“(a) Direct the Munsiff's Court, North Parur to dispose of Exts.P-3 and P-4 petitions as expeditiously as possible and within a definite time frame as fixed by this Honourable court.
(b) Pass an order of injunction restraining the respondents from trespassing upon plaint A schedule property and from committing waste or damages in plaint A schedule property in the meanwhile;
(c) Pass such other orders as are deemed fit and necessary in the interest of justice and for proper effective adjudication of the case.”
Ext.R23(D) order whereby the court below has considered the scope of Exts.P3 and P4 applications. In paragraph 3 of the order the court below has made the following observations:
2
OP(C) No.1457 of 2017
“The Adv. Commissioner has filed a report on 10.3.2017. He has given a description of the plaint A to E schedule properties. In view of the orders passed on IA 857/2017 it is felt in the interest of justice to finally dispose of this Interlocutory Application and IA.502/2017, after filing of the commission report. Till that time, the respondents and petitioner shall maintain status quo with respect to the petition A schedule property as reported by the commissioner in his report filed on 10.3.2017.”
Considering the facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that there is nothing wrong in the view taken by the court below that disposal of the interlocutory applications should be deferred until the commissioner submitted a plan and report. Deferring the consideration of interlocutory applications until a plan and report is obtained in this matter cannot be faulted. It is made clear that the court below need not wait for the convenient date of a Taluk Surveyor. Instead, it can seek the assistance from the Head Surveyor or the I or II Grade Surveyor, working in the Survey and Land Records Department, for helping the commissioner. The court below shall appoint a competent officer with integrity in this matter. After getting the plan and report, the court below shall give a reasonable opportunity to the parties to file objections, if any, and dispose of the suit as
3
OP(C) No.1457 of 2017
expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of nine months from
the date of filing of the commissioner's report and plan.
Original Petition is disposed of as above.
A. HARIPRASAD, JUDGE.
cks
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Munsiff's Court should dispose of the interlocutory applications for injunction expeditiously or await the Commissioner's report?
Whether the petition for mandatory direction to the Munsiff's Court and injunction should be allowed?
Missionary Congregation of the Blessed Sacrament (MCBS) Karukunnu
Shaji
Joy
Johnny
Davie
Varghese
A. Hariprasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
