1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:08.11.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN WP(MD)No.2236 of 2011 and MP(MD)No.1 of 2011 P.Kamatchi :Petitioner -Versus- 1. The Executive Officer, Harveypatty Town Panchayat, Tiruparankundram, Madurai – 5. 2. P.Nagalakshmi 3. R.Pandi :Respondents PRAYER:Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records relating to the first respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.362/2010 dated 13.01.2011 and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.PT.S.Narendravasan For R – 1 : Mr.Aayiram K.Selvakumar,Government Advocate For RR 2& 3 : Mr.K.Hemakarthikeyan ORDER The petitioner has come up with the above Writ Petition, challenging an order passed by the first respondent, in pursuance of a decree passed by the District Munsif Court, Thirumangalam. 2.Heard Mr.PT.S.Narendravasan, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr.Aayiram K.Selvakumar, learned Government Advocate for the first respondent and Mr.K.Hemakarthikeyan,learned Counsel for the respondents 2&3. 3.The second respondent filed a suit in O.S.No.106 of 2009, on the file of the District Munsif Court, Tirumangalam, as against the petitioner herein seeking a decree of permanent injunction. The suit was decreed by a judgment, dated 19.11.2010. The decree granted by the trial Court, not only granted a permanent injunction in favour of the respondents 2 & 3 herein, but also granted certain directions. Para 18 of the judgment which contains the decreetal part of the judgment reads as follows:- “18.In the result, the suit is decreed on the following terms:- (1)The plaintiff is directed to make an application to the Executive Officer, Harveypatti Panchayat to inspect the suit property. After the receipt of the said application within one week, the Executive Officer of Harveypatti Panchayat is directed to visit the property of both the plaintiff and the defendant and chart out a sketch, how the eves from the plaintiff's latrine to be connected in the septic tank situated in the defendant's property. The sketch shall be drawn by the Executive Officer within two weeks from the date of inspection of the property and the sketch shall be given to both the plaintiff and the defendant. (2)The Executive Officer while drawing a sketch to show how the pipe line is to be laid to connect the septic tank situated in the defendant's property the Officer would hear in mind that if any superstructure if proposed to be constructed by the defendant in near future, the said construction will not be hindered by the laying of the pipe line. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 (3)The sketch prepared by the Executive Officer for laying the pipe line is final and bind on both the parties. If any fees to be paid for the preparation of sketch, the said fees has to be paid by the plaintiff to the Executive Officer who will in turn give receipts for the same. (4)After receipt of the sketch, the plaintiff within one month shall finish the construction of laying the pipeline as per the sketch drawn by the Executive Officer. (5)The Executive Officer shall inspect the same and make a report to that effect before this Court. (6)During the construction of pipeline if any cement floor or mud floor or any superstructure of the defendant property is damaged by the plaintiff the same shall be restored in the same manner as it was existed prior to the construction. (7)If any repair to be done in the pipeline in the near future, the plaintiff shall give notice to the defendant well in advance stating about the nature of repair and its requirements and time needed for the repairing work. For the repair to be done in the pipeline and if any damages done to the cement floor or mud floor or any superstructure of the defendant property the same shall be restored as it was existed prior to the repair work. (8)All the costs of the repair work shall be borne by the plaintiff themselves. (9)The defendant is restrained by the order of permanent injunction in any way interfering with the right of pipe line work of the plaintiff.” 4.In pursuance of the above order, the first respondent herein, who was not a party to the suit, passed the impugned order, granting permission for a new connection to the respondents 2 & 3 and also directing the Subordinate Officers to take photographs and do all that is necessary. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner is before this Court. 5.Today it is admitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as the respondents 2 & 3 that the lower Appellate Court has set aside the directions issued by the trial Court, in A.S.No.13 of 2011. Though the lower Appellate Court confirmed the decree of permanent injunction, the other parts of the decree granted by the trial Court, by which directions were issued to the first respondent has been set aside by the Appellate Court. Therefore, the appropriate remedy now open to the respondents 2 & 3, is to execute the decree passed by the first Appellate Court. 6.In view of the above, the Writ Petition is allowed, setting aside the impugned order, but giving liberty to the respondents 2 & 3 to work out their remedies in accordance with the decree passed in A.S.No.13 of 2011. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AS) / TRUE COPY / Sub Assistant Registrar To: The Executive Officer,Harveypatty Town Panchayat, Tiruparankundram,Madurai – 5. +1CC to Mr.P.T.S.Narendravasan, Advocate. SR.No.38306. ps WP(MD)No.2236 of 2011 and MP(MD)No.1 of 2011 RP/21.11.2011/2P/3C. 08.11.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/