IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 4TH APRIL 2008 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 8664 of 2008(F) ------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN EP.93/2003 IN OS.341/1997 of PRL.M.C.,KOZHIKODE-II .................... PETITIONER: ---------------- SYED ALAVIYA JIFRIYA D/O.SYED FAZAL JIFRI MAB MUKHIYA NELLIKODE AMSOM AND DESOM, KOZHIKODE THALUK. BY ADV. SRI.MANJERI SUNDERRAJ SRI.B.PREMNATH (E) RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. MUHAMMATH, S/O.KUTTI ALI KULAPPURATH PADIKKAL, NELLIKODE AMSOM AND DESOM KOZHIKODE. 2. BASHEER, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.KUTTI ALI KULAPPURATH PADIKKAL, NELLIKODE AMSOM AND DESOM KOZHIKODE. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX EXT. P1 TRUE COPY OF WRITTEN COMPROMISE AGREEMENT DATED 3RD JULY 2002 EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 25.10.07 IN CRP 901/07 PASSED BY THIS COURT. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF HOSPITAL RECORDS OF THE PETITIONER ISSUED BY MERCY HOSPITAL, KONDOTTY. [ True copy ] P.A. to Judge. M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.C. NO. 8664 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 4th day of April, 2008. J U D G M E N T This writ petition is preferred to direct the Munsiff Court-II Kozhikode in E.P.93/03 in O.S.341/97 to assure full compliance with the terms of Ext.P1 compromise agreement. Ext.P1 compromise agreement is dated 3.7.2002. The parties have settled the matter and had drawn a scheme for resolving the dispute and to avoid inconvenience to both regarding the drainage water etc. Now, a Commission is already appointed and I have given specific directions in my previous order in CRP 901/07. I have stated therein that purpose can be attained by directing the Commissioner to supervise it with the junction of both the parties. 2. Now, the points raised are to the effect that the pipeline is not laid as contemplated and therefore it causes difficulty and it may affect free flow of water which will affect the party. On the other hand it is contended that the filling W.P.C 8664 OF 2008 -:2:- of the property has also caused some problems. Now, the matter to be resolved is regarding the free flow of water and avoid stagnation of water and it is for that the parties have entered into a compromise. Therefore the best procedure is to have the assistance of an expert Civil Engineer who will be able to give a clear idea how to do the same and the Commissioner who is already appointed in the matter, can, with the help of the civil engineer implement the undertakings given in the agreement so that there will be a finality to the litigation. Considering the conduct of the parties there may arise some confusion and therefore whenever such a question arises the Commissioner may seek the direction of the Court below to get appropriate orders and with that directions the work to be completed. I earlier held that both the parties will change their attitude and try to co-operate with the Court Commissioner and endeavor to W.P.C 8664 OF 2008 -:3:- avoid further complications to have a permanent solution of the dispute between them. For this purpose the parties are directed to bear the expenses in equal halves. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-