IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 29TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 8TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 29291 of 2009(F) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- 1. LILLAMMA, W/O.SHAJI, THOMMASSERY, PAPANGAMUKKU, MUNDAMVELI, KOCHI-7. 2. BABY, W/O.JOHNSON, THOMMASSERY, PAPANGAMUKKU, MUNDAMVELI, KOCHI-7. 3. WILSON, THOMMASSERY, PAPANGAMUKKU, MUNDAMVELI, KOCHI-7. 4. KUNJUMON, THOMMASSERY, PAPANGAMUKKU, MUNDAMVELI, KOCHI-7. BY ADV. SRI.P.BABU KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE TAHSILDAR (SURVEY OFFICER), TALUK OFFICE, KOCHI. 2. THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF COCHIN. 3. ANTONY, S/O.DEVASSY, THOMMASSERY, PLAPANGAMUKKU, MUNDAMVELI, KOCHI-7. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.T.K.ARAVIND KUMAR R2 BY ADV. SRI.K.ANAND R3 BY ADV. SRI.T.MADHU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs/ WP(C).No. 29291/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE SALE DEED OF 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 23/07/1991. P2: COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 08/06/2009. P3: COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 08/09/2009. P4: COPY OF JUDGMENT IN O.S. NO. 223/2009 PASSED BY THE ADDL. MUNSIFF COURT, KOCHI DATED 15/07/2010. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE svs/ ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 29291 of 2009 F ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 29th day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T According to the petitioners, there is a pathway with 10 links width leading to their property. It is their case that the third respondent, after purchasing 2.5 cents of land in survey No.16/2 of Rameswaram village, trespassed in to the property and reduced the same into his possession. On this allegation, the petitioners made Ext.P3 application before the first respondent. It is complaining of inaction on Ext.P3, this writ petition is filed. 2. From the counter affidavit, it is disclosed that according to the first respondent, the property, which is sought to be measured in Ext.P3, is a pathway and is vested with the second respondent Corporation and, therefore, if at all the same is to be surveyed, the second respondent should make a proper application. 3. If the pathway is one which is vested with the W.P.(C) No.29291/09 : 2 : Corporation, necessarily it is for the Corporation to safeguard the pathway is vested in them. 4. Having regard to the allegations in the writ petition that the property is a pathway, which is allegedly vested with the Corporation and as the petitioner has a case that the same has been trespassed into, I direct that, on the production of a copy of this judgment, the second respondent will verify records and if as stated by the petitioners, the pathway is a vested one, the second respondent shall move the first respondent for survey and demarcation of the pathway. 5. Petitioner to produce a copy of this judgment and writ petition before the second respondent, who shall take appropriate action in the matter, as expeditiously as possible. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks The words and figure “Survey No.16/2” occurring in the 4th line of the first paragraph of the judgment dated 29-11-2010 in W.P (C) No.29291/2009 are corrected and substituted with “Survey No.96/2”, vide order dated 25-02-2011 in I.A.No.2503/2011. Sd/- Registrar (Judicial)