IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 7TH JANUARY 2008 / 17TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 580 of 2008(R) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------------- KABEER KUTTY, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.IBRAHIM PILLAI, VILAYIL VEEDU, VADAKKUMKARA KIZHAKKECHERRY, UMAYANELLOOR P.O. THAZHUTHALA VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.VENUGOPALAN NAIR RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. ABDUL KAREEM, S/O.HANEEFA KUNJU, 'FASEELA MANZIL', VADAKKUMKARA KIZHAKKECHERRY, UMAYANELLOOR P.O., THAZHUTHALA VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. ASOK KUMAR, TALUK SURVEYOR, TALUK OFFICE, KOLLAM. 3. ANIL, TALUK SURVEYOR, TALUK OFFICE, KOLLAM. 4. FAZALUDEEN, ADDL.TAHSILDAR, KOLLAM TALUK TALUK OFFICE, KOLLAM. 5. THE TAHSILDAR, KOLLAM TALUK, TALUK OFFICE, KOLLAM. 6. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHATHANNOOR. 7. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTIYAM. R5 TO R7 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. R. BINDU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- W.P.(C). NO. 580 OF 2008 --------------------- Dated this the 7th day of January, 2008 J U D G M E N T This writ petition is filed to direct respondents 2 to 6 not to do anything in or upon the properties covered by Ext.P1 till disposal of the suit by issuance of an appropriate writ. It is submitted that the writ petitioner has obtained an order in his favour as per order in IA 2752/07 in OS 499/07 whereby the Munsiff Court, Kollam, has restrained the respondent therein, namely 1st respondent herein, from constructing compound wall and committing waste and interfering with the use of 'C' schedule way of the petitioner until further orders. Now, it is submitted that behind that order with the connivance of respondents 2 to 5, attempt is made to construct the wall. 2. I am afraid that the extra ordinary jurisdiction conferred under Article 227 cannot be used in these type of cases and much more under Article 226 of the Constitution of India because it relates to civil right of parties, which can be decided only by a competent civil court. Jurisdiction under Article 226 does not confer power to a WPC NO 580/08 2 court to decide the factual matrix by regular adjudication in the form of evidence. When there is grievance and already when a suit is pending before a competent court, it is always possible for the party to move that court for appropriate relief, especially when it is alleged that there is an attempt for violation of the order passed by that court. With these observations, the writ petition is dismissed. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps WPC NO 580/08 3