IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 4TH JULY 2011 / 13TH ASHADHA 1933 OP(C).No. 1231 of 2011(O) ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN AS 47/04 OF SUB COURT, CHERTHALA AS.46/2004 of SUB COURT, CHERTHALA OS.1027/2001 of PRL.MUNSIFF COURT, CHERTHALA .................... PETITIONER --------------------- VELAPPAN, S/O. KOCHU, AGED 64 YEARS, KORAKKAMPALLIL HOUSE, PERUMTHURUTH MURI, KANJIKKUZHI VILLAGE, CHERTHALA TALUK. BY ADV. MR. K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN MR. GEORGE MATHEW MR. M.D.SASIKUMAR MR. DIPU JAMES RESPONDENTS: --------------- RAMAKRISHNAN, S/O. RAMAN, KORAKKAMPALLIL HOUSE, PERUMTHURUTH MURI, KANJIKKUZHI VILLAGE, CHERTHALLA TALUK, NOW RESIDING IN PLAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, PODIYADI.P.O., THIRUVALLA TALUK. PIN-689110. ADV. MR. A.T.ANILKUMAR SMT.V.SHYLAJA THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP(C).No. 1231 of 2011(O) APPENDIX --------------- PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS ----------------------------------- P1:- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 7.4.04 IN I.A.NO.526/04 IN A.S.NO.47/04 ON THE FILE OF THE SUB COURT, CHERTHALA. RESPPONDENT'S EXHIBITS :- NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ O.P.(C). No.1231 of 2011 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 4th day of July 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner filed O.S.No.1027 of 2001 in the court of learned Munsiff, Cherthala for a declaration of right of easement by way of prescription and prohibitory injunction alleging that he has got right of access along the southern side of property of respondent. Respondent denied the allegation. Learned Munsiff disposed of the suit holding that petitioner has right of access through the way having width of 3 feet lying on the southern side of the property of respondent. Both sides appealed to the Sub Judge, Cherthala. Appeal preferred by petitioner was dismissed and the appeal of the respondent/defendant was allowed shifting the pathway (having width of 3 feet) to the northern side of the property of respondent. Petitioner has applied O.P.(C). No.1231 of 2011 -: 2 :- for a copy of judgment and decree and finding that it may take time, has approached this Court seeking a direction to issue copy of judgment and decree and in the mean time directing respondents to maintain status quo. 2. I have heard counsel on both sides. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner has already received copy of judgment and decree of appeals. However he seeks some time to file second appeal and in the mean time, direct respondent to maintain status quo. 3. This Court has issued an interim direction as prayed for, initially for two weeks as per order dated 25.3.2011. Later, that order was extended for three months as per order dated 5.4.2011. That order can be extended for another three weeks from this day or till the petitioner prefers second appeal and orders thereon are passed, whichever is earlier. Resultantly, this original petition is disposed of directing that the interim order passed by this Court on O.P.(C). No.1231 of 2011 -: 3 :- 25.3.2011 and extended thereafter will remain in force for a period of three weeks from this day or till petitioner prefers second appeal and the said court passed orders on the application for stay/injunction as the case may be, whichever is earlier. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. Jvt