IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 29TH OCTOBER 2009 / 7TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 27179 of 2009(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MULLIKULANGARA DEVI KSHETHRA BHARANA SAMITHI, MAVELIKKARA, REP.BY ITS PRESIDENT SRI.K.RAMAKRISHNA UNNITHAN, ANIL BHAVANAM, PALLARIMANGALAM, THEKKEKARA. BY ADV. SRI.P.JACOB VARGHESE, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.RASHEED C.NOORANAD RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. C.K.RADHAKRISHNA PANICKER, CHAKKALA VADAKKATHIL, PONAKAM MURI, THEKKEKKARA VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, ALAPPUZHA. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, CHENGANNUR. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, MAVELIKKARA. BY ADV. M/S. SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN FOR R1 SRI.T.S.HARIKUMAR FOR R1 SRI.K.JAGADEESH FOR R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.R.LAKSHMI NARAYAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C) NO.27179 OF 2009 EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.21906/2004 BEFORE THIS HON'BLE HIGH COURT. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF RDO DATED 4.1.2007. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF SETTLEMENT REGISTER. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION OF THE TEMPLE COMMITTEE DT. 21.6.2009 EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 17.7.2009 IN W.P.(C) NO.17794 OF 2008 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT DT. 7.9.2009. EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION FILED BEFORE 4TH RESPONDENT DT. 9.9.2009. EXT.P8 PHOTOS OF THE DISPUTED LAND. EXT.P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY THIS PETITIONER BEFORE THE SUPERINTENDENT OF RE-SURVEY DATED7.9.2009 //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. P.R.RAMAN & P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.27179 of 2009 ------------------------------- Dated this the 29th October, 2009 J U D G M E N T Raman, J. The main relief sought for in the writ petition is for a direction to respondents 2 to 4 to measure the property on the basis of Ext.P3 Settlement Register. Ordinarily no such relief can be granted since a direction to measure the land by itself is not an enforceable right, and may not bring a finality of the dispute between the parties. But we find that the dispute between the parties was the subject matter of a earlier writ petition, which resulted in Ext.P5 judgment of this Court. If, Ext.P5 judgment is read along with prayers made in the writ petition, we find, virtually what is sought for is a review or modification of the judgment. In Ext.P5 judgment, this Court recorded the consent made by the fourth respondent based on the resolution passed and directed to measure the property and further direction was also given based on the measurement. But according to the W.P.(C) No.27179/2009 2 petitioner, measurement has to be made as per the Settlement Register and that was the resolution that was passed. If so, the remedy open to the petitioner is to seek for a review of the judgment and not to file a separate writ petition. So however, in order to enable the petitioner to file a review petition, status quo as on today shall be maintained for a period of 10 days, and thereafter, subject to any orders that may be passed in the review petition, if any filed. The writ petition is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. nj.