IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 7TH MARCH 2008 / 17TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 33139 of 2007(T) --------------------------------------- CMA.11/2007 OF ADDL.DISTRICT COURT, KOZHIKODE, OS.392/2006 OF PRL.MUNSIFF COURT,KOZHIKODE-II. .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- MULLASSERI SIVADASAN, S/O.PARANGODAN @ APPUTTI, AGED 56, KADALUNDI AMSOM, PAZHANJANNUR DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.HARISH R. MENON, SRI.K.T.SHYAMKUMAR. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. PALLOORTHODI PREMA, W/O.VASU, AGED 63, PALLOORTHODI HOUSE, FEROKE AMSOM, NALLOOR DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK, PIN : 673631. 2. PALLOORTHODI SURESH BABU, S/O.VASU, AGED 43, PALLOORTHODI HOUSE, FEROKE AMSOM, NALLOOR DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK, PIN : 673 631. BY ADV. SRI. A.P. CHANDRASEKHARAN (SR.), ADV. SMT.PRABHA R.MENON, ADV. SRI.M.KRISHNAKUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/03/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.33139/2007-T: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE PLAINT O.S. NO. 392/2006 ON THE FILE OF MUNSIFF COURT II, KOZHIKODE. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE COMMISSIONER IN THE ABOVE SAID SUIT. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE PLAN SUBMITTED BY THE COMMISSIONER IN THE ABOVE SAID SUIT. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED IN IA. NO. 2318/2006. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN C.M.A. NO. 11/2007 PASSED BY THE DISTRICT JUDGE, KOZHIKODE. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// prv. M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.C. NO. 33139 OF 2007 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 7th day of March, 2008. J U D G M E N T This writ petition is preferred against the order of the I Addl. District Judge, Kozhikode in CMA 11/07. The said CMA was preferred against the order of the Munsiff in I.A.2318/06 in O.S.392/06 whereby the Munsiff granted an order of injunction. The appellate court has reversed the same and dismissed the injunction application. When the matter came up for consideration I felt that it requires evidence to dispose of the matter one way or the other and the counsel appearing for the parties said as this cannot be done by this Court, the matter can be directed to be disposed of by the trial court after evidence as expeditiously as possible. It is also agreed that as an interim arrangement permission can be granted to use the said passage but making it clear that there shall not be any construction or alteration of the physical features of the said pathway till the disposal of the W.P.C 33139 OF 2007 -:2:- case. I make it very clear this is only done as an interim arrangement to facilitate the speedy disposal and it shall not be taken as any opinion expressed by this Court in deciding the case. Therefore the writ petition is disposed of as follows: (1) The plaintiff in the suit is permitted to use the passage without altering the physical features of the property or commit any waste therein till the disposal of the suit. (2) The Court is directed to take up the matter for trial and dispose it of as expeditiously as possible after affording equal opportunities to both sides to contest the case and if possible try to dispose it of before the Court closes for summer holidays or in case of difficulty at any rate before 31.5.08. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-