IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 9TH JUNE 2011 / 19TH JYAISHTA 1933 OP(C).No. 1588 of 2011(O) ----------------------------------- OS.268/2010 of MUNSIFF COURT,MUVATTUPUZHA .................... PETITIONERS:- ----------------------- 1. SATHYAN,KUNNATHRA KUDIYIL RESIDING AT VETTIMUKALATH HOUSE,ARAMALLOOR KARA, ERAMALLOOR VILLAGE,MUVATTUPUZHA. 2. JANANI,W/O.SATHYAN,VETTIMUKALATH HOUSE, ERAMALLOOR KARA,ERAMALLOOR VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.R.BINDU (SASTHAMANGALAM) SRI.PRASANTH M.P RESPONDENT: --------------------- KUTTAPPAN,S/O.KOCHOLA,VETTIMUKULATH HOUSE,ERAMALLOOR KARA,ERAMALLOOR VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. 686 661 THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: smt K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------ O.P(C)No.1588 OF 2011 ------------------------------ Dated this the 9th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioners, the defendants in O.S.No.268 of 2010, on the file of the Court of the Munsiff of Muvattupuzha challenge the order dated 11th April, 2011 in I.A.No.976 of 2011. 2. The plaintiff claimed a right of easement by prescription over a pathway, which according to him is having a width of 8 feet. The pathway starts from the Panchayat road, about 150 metres on the western side of the plaint schedule. The plaintiff stated that the pathway leads towards East and passes through the sides of several properties including the property of the defendants and reaches the property of the plaintiff. The suit was filed for a declaration of easement right and for consequential injunction. The trial court passed an order of status quo. O.P(C)No.1588 OF 2011 2 The defendants contended that the pathway has a width of only 3 feet. 3. The plaintiff filed I.A.No.976 of 2011 for permitting them to draw pipelines through the pathway in order to take water connection to the residence of the plaintiff. It was alleged that the water connection is being given by the Panchayat and that allotment has been made for that purpose. The pipelines are to be installed and it could be installed only through the pathway, according to the plaintiff. The defendants opposed the prayer. The court below allowed the application. However, taking note of the contention of the defendants that the pathway is having a width of only 3 feet, the court below directed that the pipelines shall be laid beneath the soil in the 3 feet width portion of the pathway. The court below also imposed a condition that the pipelines shall be removed, if the final decision in the case is against the plaintiff. The court below noticed that the title deed of the defendants shows that O.P(C)No.1588 OF 2011 3 there is a 3 feet wide pathway on the southern side of their property. The order passed by the court below is legal and proper. No interference is called for under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The Original Petition is accordingly, dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE. cms