The High Court held it not proper to interfere with the confirmed injunction order but directed lower courts to expedite disposal within three months with parties maintaining the status quo regarding the way.
Direction to lower court to expedite disposal of the suit within three months; parties not to alter the way.
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 P.SOMARAJAN
TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 24TH ASWINA, 1940
OP(C).No. 65 of 2015
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CMA 23/2013 of SUB COURT, CHERTHALA,
DATED 25-10-2014
AGAINST THE ORDER IN I.A.No.2081/2012 IN OS No.380/2012 of ADDL.MUNSIFF'S COURT,CHERTHALA, DATED 12-06-2013
PETITIONER/APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF:
VISWAMBHARAN PILLAI, AGED 69 YEARS, S/O.PARAMESWARAN PILLAI, VISWALAYATHIL HOUSE, CHERTHALA SOUTH MURI, CHERTHALA SOUTH VILLAGE.
BY ADV. SRI.K.V.SADANANDA PRABHU
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS:
1 MATHUKUTTY, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.PAUL, CHAKKALACKAL VEETTIL, CHERTHALA SOUTH MURI, CHERTHALA SOUTH VILLAGE.
2 BHASKARAN PILLAI @ PAKKAN, AGED 55 YEARS, KANNUMKOOTTUNGAL HOUSE, CMC-17, CHERTHALA SOUTH MURI, CHERTHALA SOUTH VILLAGE. BY ADVS.SRI.T.JAYAKRISHNAN SRI.R.KRISHNAKUMAR (CHERTHALA)
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16.10.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
O.P.(C) No.65 of 2015
2
JUDGMENT
Against the order passed in I.A.No.2081/2012 in O.S.No.380/2012 of Additional Munsiff's Court, Cherthala, dated 12.06.2013, and the judgment in C.M.A.No.23/2013 of Sub Court, Cherthala, dated 25.10.2014, this original petition is filed by the plaintiff/petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
O.P.(C) No.65 of 2015
3
Original petition is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
P.SOMARAJAN
JUDGE
DMR/-
O.P.(C) No.65 of 2015
4
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMISSION REPORT DATED 7.8.2012 FILED VIDE ORDERS IN IA.2081/12. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF A ROUGH PLAN PREPARED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER IN THE ABOVE IA. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN IA.NO.2081/12 DATED 12.6.13 OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, CHERTHALA.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CMA NO.23/2013 DATED 25.10.14 OF SUB COURT, CHERTHALA.
RESPONDENTS'EXHIBITS :
| EXHIBIT R1(a) |
TRUE COPY OF PLAINT IN O.S.No.393/2012 DATED 10.08.2012 IN THE FILES OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF'S COURT, CHERTHALA. |
|---|---|
| EXHIBIT R1(b) |
TRUE COPY OF WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN O.S.No.393/2012 DATED 18.12.2012. |
| EXHIBIT R1(c) |
TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF'S COURT, CHERTHALA IN O.S. No.393/2012 DATED 31.7.2014. |
| EXHIBIT R1(d) |
TRUE COPY OF COMMISSION REPORT FILED IN O.S.No.393/2012 IN THE FILES OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, CHERTHALA. |
EXHIBIT R1(e) TRUE COPY OF PLAINT FILED AGAINST THE 1ST RESPONDENT AND HIS BROTHER GEORGEKUTTY BY THE FATHER OF DW5 IN EXHIBIT R-(a) SUIT.
// TRUE COPY //
P.A. TO JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the confirmed interim injunction order under Article 227.
Whether a condition should be imposed to expedite disposal of the suit regarding the disputed way.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
VISWAMBHARAN PILLAI
MATHUKUTTY
BHASKARAN PILLAI
P. SOMARAJAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
