IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID THURSDAY, THE 24TH JULY 2008 / 2ND SRAVANA 1930 CRP.No. 272 of 2005() --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 04/11/2004 IN EP.250/2001 IN OS.1610/1997 of I ADDL.M.C.,TRIVANDRUM .................... REVN. PETITIONER/THIRD JUDGEMENT DEBTOR --------------------------------------------------- THE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,CORPORATION BUILDINGS,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON,SC,TVM CORPN. SRI.K.VINODKUMAR SRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR RESPONDENTS: DECREE HOLDER & 1ST JUDGEMENT DEBTOR ------------------------------------------------- 1. D.SANTHA,D/O.DAKSHAYANI, KAVUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU,KARUMAM, POOZHIKKUNNU,NEMOM VILLAGE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,COLLECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA FOR R1 THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER IN I.A. NO. 738 OF 2005 IN C.R.P. NO.272 OF 2005. DISMISSED 24.7.2008 Sd/-(HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE) HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. -------------------------------------------- C.R.P. NO. 272 OF 2005 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of July, 2008 O R D E R The third respondent in E.P. No.250 of 2001 in O.S. No.1610 of 1997 on the file of the I Additional Munsiff's Court, Thiruvananthapuram is the revision petitioner. The revision is directed against the order passed by the execution court dated 4.11.2004 in the above execution petition. The decree holder filed an application under Order XX1 Rule 32 C.P.C. for enforcement of the decree for permanent prohibitory injunction. The trial court found that the construction of the compound wall by obstructing the pathway was a clear case of disobedience of the decree for injunction and, therefore, deputed an Amin to demolish and remove the compound wall on the southern side of the school compound for a length of 1.5 metres at the point AB shown in Ext.A2 sketch. 2. It is reported by the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent/decree holder that pursuant to the order passed by the trial court, the obstruction has been removed and the pathway is opened and C.R.P. NO.272/2005 2 that the decree holder is using the said pathway without any obstruction. The revision petitioner who challenged the impugned order submitted that the alleged violation was admittedly on 5.5.2000 and that the decree was obtained against Nemom Grama Panchayat. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner submitted that before the filing of the execution petition, the area was brought within the territorial jurisdiction of Thiruvananthapuram Corporation on 1.10.2000 and that in the execution petition which was subsequently filed on 20.6.2001, the decree holder made the revision petitioner a party, being the successor-in-interest of Nemom Grama Panchayat. The learned counsel also submitted that the revision petitioner has nothing to do with the violation of the order of injunction passed by the trial court and that the disobedience alleged was at a time when Nemom Grama Panchayat was in the party array. Counsel, therefore, prays that the order under challenge may be set aside. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the first respondent/decree holder submitted that the decree holder has no objection in closing the matter since she is using the pathway without obstruction from any quarters. In view of the above submission, no further orders are required in this Civil Revision Petition. The order under challenge is set aside. E.P.No.250 of 2001 in O.S. No.1610 of 1997 on the file of the I Additional Munsiff's C.R.P. NO.272/2005 3 Court, Thiruvananthapuram is closed. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly closed. There will be no order as to costs. (HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE) sp/ C.R.P. NO.272/2005 4 HAURN-UL-RASHID, J. C.R.P. NO.272/2005 O R D E R 24th July, 2008