IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 16TH DECEMBER 2008 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 RP.No. 1225 of 2007(A) ---------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN CRP.885/2007 Dated 08/10/2007 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S):REVISION PETITIONERS ------------------------------------------------------------- 1. VIMALA, MALIKA VEEDU, BEACH NORTH WARD, KOLLAM. 2. ARAVINDKSHA KURUP, MALIKA VEEDU, BEACH NORTH WARD, KOLLAM. 3. RAJAMMA, (DIED), MALIKA VEEDU, BEACH NORTH WARD, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT ---------------------------------------- VIJAYA LEKSHMI AMMA, KALLU PARAMBIL VEEDU, CHENTHAPPOOR, MUKHATHALA, THRIKKOVIL VATTOM VILLAGE, DECENT JUNCTION P.O., KOLLAM. ADV. SRI.V.V.RAJA FOR R1 SRI.M.T.SURESHKUMAR FOR R1 THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = R.P. 1225 OF 2007 IN C.R.P. NO. 885 OF 2007 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 16th day of December, 2008. O R D E R This R.P. is preferred against the judgment of this Court dated 8.10.07 in CRP 885/07. The revision petition was preferred against the order of the Principal Munsiff, Kollam in E.P.69/02 in O.S.1229/97. There was a compromise between the parties in the Lok Adalath whereby it was agreed to have a passage of a width of 1.60 metres. When the execution petition was moved it was found that one Anjali tree and one mango tree were standing in the way and it has been cut and removed. There was one yielding coconut tree about 40 years of age and it is a slightly slanting tree wherein the width of the passage, if the tree is not cut would be reduced by 11 cms. I also considered the factor that there was no motorable access and therefore as held by the trial court I also ordered that it was not necessary to cut and remove the coconut tree. Now the R.P. 1225 OF 2007 IN C.R.P. NO. 885 OF 2007 -:2:- review petition is filed to review that order and it is also stated there is a mango tree as well as a coconut tree obstructing the pathway in ground F of the review petition. When people compromise a matter under the Adalath the purpose and presumption is that those who come as enemies part as friends with a magnanimous mind but unfortunately still something lurks in the mind and that has given raise to this execution as well as this revision petition and the review petition. I feel at one point if the width is to be reduced by 11 cms. by any stretch of imagination it cannot be said to be a violation of the compromise decree or breach of conditions of the decree and therefore I do not propose to interfere with the order passed by me in the revision petition with respect to the coconut tree. But it is brought to my notice that there is a mango tree which is causing some obstacles. The review petitioner herein is at liberty to move the executing Court and after hearing both sides if such a mango tree is found there direction can be issued to the other side to cut and R.P. 1225 OF 2007 IN C.R.P. NO. 885 OF 2007 -:3:- remove that mango tree so that once for all both of them can live peacefully and I hope and pray that none of the parties will come to this Court again for a width of 4½ inches. The R.P. is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-