IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE FRIDAY, THE 25TH JANUARY 2008 / 5TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 3114 of 2008(U) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ SUJITH.A., S/O.ADAMKAVIL RADHAKRISHNAN, ADAMKAVIL HOUSE, ATHANNI P.O., THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.K.R.RAJKUMAR SRI.JAGADEESH LAKSHMAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. SUNDARAN, S/O.RAMAN, ADATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, PERINGANDUR VILLAGE, THALAPPALLY TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. USHA, W/O.SUNDARAN, ADATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, PERINGANDUR VILLAGE, THALAPPALLY TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. THE SECRETARY, MUNDATHIKODE GRAMA PANCHAYATH, THIRUTHI PARAMBU P.O., THRISSUR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25-1-2008 , THE COURT ON 25/01/2008 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Pius C. Kuriakose, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 3114 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 25th day of January,2008 JUDGMENT In the facts and circumstances of this case, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition and direct the Panchayat to take immediate action on Ext.P1 complaint submitted by the petitioner before the 3rd respondent which is to the effect that respondents 1 and 2 have made certain constructions in gross violation of statutory rules. It is conceded by the petitioner himself that in respect of the very same subject matter, a civil suit O.S. No.68/2008 is pending before the Sub Court, Thrissur and the Sub Court has already passed order of injunction restraining respondents 1 and 2 from carrying out the construction. 2. Hence, I dispose of the writ petition directing the petitioner/plaintiff in that suit to move the learned Subordinate Judge for appropriate urgent orders in the light of what is alleged to be gross violation of the statutory rules and the injunction order. If the petitioner is not a party to the suit, it will be open to him to move the Sub Court seeking his impleadment in the suit. In the meanwhile, respondents 1 WPC 3114/08 2 and 2 are reminded that if the constructions, which are being made by them are in violation of the injunction order passed by the Sub Court or are in violation of the statutory rules, the constructions stand the risk of being compelled to be removed. Pius C. Kuriakose, Judge. mn.