IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 28TH JUNE 2010 / 7TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 20000 of 2010(O) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN IA.338 AND 339/2010 IN OS.40/2007 of SUB COURT, PALA .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. VARAMBANATTU SREE DHARMA SASTHA TEMPLE, REPRESENTED BY ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE SECRETARY, M.N.GOPALAN,S/O.NARAYANA,MUDAVANATTU HOUSE, ADIVARAM KARA,POONJAR THEKKEKARA VILLAGE. 2. VARAMBANATTU SREE DHARMA SASTHA TEMPLE, REPRESENTED BY ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE JOINT SECRETARY,MANOJ,IYKARATHAKKAL HOUSE,ADIVARAM KARA, POONJAR THEKKEKARA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.HARIDAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR,KOTTAYAM. 2. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PALA. 3. THE TAHSILDAR,MEENACHIL. 4. VILLAGE OFFICER,POONJAR NADUBHAGAM VILLAGE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.20000 of 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of June, 2010. JUDGMENT Petitioners who are plaintiffs in O.S.No.40 of 2007 of the court of learned Sub Judge, Pala prayed for declaration of title and for prohibitory injunction. Dispute is concerning a small plot of land measuring about two cents situated on the side of public road over which petitioners say, an offering box of the temple was installed about 50 years back. Defendant No.5 filed a complaint stating that the offering box has been recently installed in Government puramboke land based on which respondent Nos.1 to 4/State and its officials issued notice to the petitioners to demolish the offering box. Challenging that action petitioners filed the suit. Respondent Nos.1 to 4 contended that suit property is part of Government puramboke land where petitioners installed the offering box immediately before institution of the suit. Petitioners asserted that they have been in possession of the suit property for about 50 years and hence if at all respondent Nos. 1 to 4 had any right over the property it is lost by adverse possession and limitation. Petitioners adduced evidence. Defendant No.5 onwards also have adduced evidence. At that stage petitioners filed I.A.No.338 of 2010 and 339 of 2010 seeking permission to serve interrogatory on respondent Nos.1 to 4 and to ascertain whether in accordance with the direction of the Supreme Court the State has filed affidavit in the Supreme Court as to whether disputed land is puramboke land or not. On service of notice on learned Assistant Government Pleader he, obviously after getting instruction from respondent Nos.1 to 4 submitted before court below that as on the date WP(C) No.20000/2010 2 submission was made State has not filed any affidavit in the Supreme Court and instead, time was requested to file the affidavit. Learned Sub Judge disposed of I.A.Nos.338 and 339 of 2010 on the strength of submission made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader. Learned counsel for petitioners referring to Ext.P9, copy of the order of the Supreme Court would contend that as per the said order only the State of West Bengal has requested time to file affidavit. On going through the records I am unable to accept that interpretation of learned counsel. Here is a case where learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4 in the trial court obviously on getting instruction from respondent Nos.1 to 4 has made a submission in the court below that as on the date submission was made no affidavit had been filed by the State in the Supreme Court in Ext.P7, proceeding and that time is being requested to file affidavit. That is the matter sought to be ascertained through interrogatory. In view of that submission of learned Assistant Government Pleader which the court below has recorded it was not necessary to proceed with I.A.No.338 and 339 of 2010. As such I do not find reason to interfere with the order under challenge. Writ Petition is closed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks