IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 7TH APRIL 2008 / 18TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 10383 of 2008(J) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------------- S.M. KHAN, T.C.4/902 PIPE LINE ROAD,KAUDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.R.ANANDAKUTTAN SMT.M.HEMALATHA SRI.R.S.MADHU SRI.MAHESH ANANDAKUTTAN RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. C.D.VINCENT, S/O.CHEMMANNUR DEVASY, RESIDING AT T.C.11/1549, CLIFF HOUSE ROAD, NANTHENCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. M/S. BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD. KOCHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 3. SUHARA BEEVI, D/O.ABDUL REHUMANKUNJU, T.C.25/3355, CHIRKULAM ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SALMA BEEVI, THEKKEVILA VEEDU, NEAR MUSLIM HIGH SCHOOL, EDAVA P.O. CHIRAYINKIL TALUK. 5. SAINABA BEEVI, NAZAR MANZIL EDAVA P.O., CHIRAYINKIL TALUK. 6. RUKHIYA BEEVI, LILLIHA MANZIL, NEAR MUSLIM HIGH SCHOOL, EDAVA P.O. CHIRAYINKIL TALUK. 7. MOHAMMED ABDUL KHADDAR, KIZHKKEVILA VEEDU, VENKULAM, EDAVA P.O. CHIRAYINKIL TALUK. 8. MOHAMMED KASSIM, THEKKEVILA VEEDU, NEAR MUSLIM HIGH SCHOOL, EDAVA P.O. CHIRAYINKIL TALUK. 9. NIZAR AHAMMED, THEKKEVILA VEED, NEAR MUSLIM HIGH SCHOOL, EDAVA P.O. CHIRAYINKIL TALUK. Kss ..2/- ....2...... WPC.NO.10383/2008 J 10. MOHAMMED FATHIMA, THEKKEVILA VEED, NEAR MUSLIM HIGH SCHOOL, EDAVA P.O. CHIRAYINKIL TALUK. 11. MARIYAKUTTY, D/O.MAIMOONUMMAL SUNITHA BUILDING FROM VILAYIL VEEDU EDAVA DESOM, EDAVA VILLAGE, CHIRAYINKIL TALUK. 12. AZEENA, W/O.NAZIMUDDIN AZEENA MANZIL, KURAKKANI DESOM VARKALA VILLAGE. 13. NEGINUNNEESA, D/O.FATHIMA BEEVI AZEENA MANZIL, KURAKKANI DESOM, VARKALA. 14. RUKIYA BEEVI, D/O.FATHIMA BEEVI AZEENA MANZIL, KURAKKANI DESOM, VARKALA. 15. YOOSUF, S/O.ABDUL REHUMAN KUNJU MANAPPURAM HOUSE, EDAVA VILLAGE, EDAVA CHIRAYINKIL. 16. HASSAN KHAN, S/O.USMAN PILLAI T.C.45/823(1), BEEMAPALLY, THIRUVANANTHAPRUAM. 17. BIJU, S/O.SUDHAKARAN MANACAUDVILAKATHU VEEDU, VAKKOM, CHIRAYINKIL. 18. MOIDEEN, S/O.USMAN PILLAI, TC.45/267 BEEMAPALLY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 19. BINDHU JOSEPH, W/O.JOSEPH TURN DURI BRAVE WILDWOOD, 212, MASSOORI STATE U.S.A. REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER JOSE ALUKKAS, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 20. BEENA THOMAS, W/O.THOMAS, BRAIVE WOOD ESTATE, PENISULVANIA, U.S.A. REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER JOSE ALUKKAS, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 21. P.A.JOSE, REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER JOSE ALUKKAS, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV.SRI.K.JAYAKUMAR SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN BY SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SC, B.P.C. R19 TO R21 BY ADV. SRI. S.V.BALAKRISHNA IYER (Sr.) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No. 10383 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the th day of April, 2008. = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = = = = = J U D G M E N T This writ petition is preferred challenging the order of the District Judge, Thiruvananthapuram in O.P.(T.P).No.234/2007, whereby the court refused to allow the transfer application. A brief reference to the order would show that the prayer is to consolidate five suits which are produced as Exts.P1 to P5. The learned District Judge found that O.S.No.399/98 was a suit filed by the 3rd petitioner in the transfer O.P. against 1st petitioner and Bharat Petroleum Company Limited for a decree for injunction restraining the defendants or their men from attempting in any manner to obstruct and prevent the use of right of way. O.S. 291/98 was a suit filed by the 1st petitioner in the transfer O.P. against respondents 1 to 3 who are predecessors of the contesting respondents 23 and 24 from opening a new pathway and also from installing any gate on the western portion. Now I am informed that the said suit O.S.No.399/98 has been amended and converted into one for recovery of possession of the W.P.(C).No. 10383 OF 2008 2 property. O.S.No.410/98 is a suit for declaration and recovery of possession of the property where I am informed that the contesting respondents herein has purchased some shares. But still they are not made parties before the court. O.S.No.902/2007 is a suit for injunction with respect to possession and O.S.No.904/2007 is against digging and removal of earth from the suit property. Now the prayer is to consolidate all these suits. The court below found that the allegations in the petition and the nature of the right claimed in each suit is not identical and there is no necessity that the suits be transferred to one court. O.S.Nos.291 and 399 of 1998 relates to the same property and they are already consolidated and lying before one court. O.S.No.410/98 is a suit intertwined between the alleged owners of the property from whom a portion is acquired by the contesting respondents and larger issues are involved in O.S.Nos.902 and 904 of 2007 relate to injunction and removing of earth. So far as O.S.Nos.291 and 399 of 1998 are concerned, it is with respect to one cent of land and right of way. It need not be tacked with the cases of larger issues. O.S.No.410/98 is an intertwined one. Parties thereon are fighting on larger issues W.P.(C).No. 10383 OF 2008 3 where a small share purchased by the contesting respondents. The nature of the enquiry will also be different. Therefore as observed by the court below I also do not find any ground to transfer all these suits to one court for a joint trial and if it is done instead of aiding the court for an effective early disposal it will only be complicated and protracted and therefore I do not interfere with the decision of the learned District Judge and accordingly the writ petition is dismissed. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE bkn/-