IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 19TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 30TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 2970 of 2008(C) --------------------------------- OS.703/2004 of PRL.MUNSIFF COURT, NEYYATTINKARA .................... PETITIONERS: APPELLANTS-DEFENDANTS: ---------------------------------- 1. SUKUMARAN NADAR, AGED 59 YEARS, S/O.AYYAPPAN NADAR, RESIDING AT KUTTANIMATHIL VEEDU, ARUMANNOOR DESOM, THIRUPURAM PAKUTHI. 2. SOBARAJ, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O. SUKUMARAN NADAR, KUTTANIMATHIL VEEDU, ARUMANNOOR DESOM, THIRUPURAM PAKUTHI. BY ADV. SRI. R.T. PRADEEP SRI. V. VIJULAL RESPONDENT: RESPONDENT-PLAINTIFF: ----------------- SIVARAJAN NADAR, AGED 62, S/O. AYYAPPAN NADAR, RESIDING AT THANKARAJ BHAVAN, KUTTANIMATHIL, ARUMANNOOR DESOM, THIRUPURAM PAKUTHI BY ADV. SRI. PIRAPPANCODE V.S. SUDHIR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 2970/2008(C) A P P E N D I X PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT. P1 : COPY OF the JUDGMENT DATED 18.3.06 IN O.S. NO. 703/04. EXT. P2 : COPY OF THE DECREE WITH PLAN APPENDED DATED 18.3.06. EXT. P3 : COPY OF the APPEAL MEMORANDUM DATED 6.10.06 IN A.S. NO. 98 OF 2006. EXT. P4 : COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.7.07 IN W.P.(C) NO. 22283/2007. EXT. P5 : COPY OF ORDER DATED 14.9.07 IN I.A. NO. 1912/2006 IN A.S. NO. 98/2006 BY SUB COURT, NEYYATTINKARA. EXT. P6 : COPY OF E.P. NO. 262/2006 DATED 25.8.06. EXT. P7 : COPY OF THE INTERIM REPORT DATED 2.7.07 IN E.P. NO. 262 OF 2006. EXT. P8 : COPY OF THE COMMISSION REPORT DATED 1.11.07. EXT. P9 : COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10.12.2007 IN E.A. NO. 811/2007 IN E.P. NO. 262 OF 2006 IN O.S. NO. 703/2004. // True Copy // P.A. to Judge. ps M.N.KRISHNAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No.2970 OF 2008 -------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of February, 2008 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~~ This writ petition is preferred with a prayer to set aside Exts.P5 and P9. The dispute is between two brothers who have 7.292 cents of property each and separated by a wall. In the suit there was a prayer for permanent injunction. A Commissioner was appointed and he submitted the report and the court has fixed the boundary line as EKJ line. The court also allowed the plaintiff therein to do maintenance work of the boundary wall on EKJ line of C1(a) plan in the presence of a Commissioner appointed by the court. 2. During the pendancy of the appeal, it appears that the wall in existence had fallen down and the reasons are different according to the parties about which this court is not concerned very much at this stage. But the entire litigation between the brothers can be settled, if there is a proper strong compound wall demarcating the properties between the two and there cannot be any dispute that the compound wall has to be constructed along the EKJ line. Since the compound wall which was there at the time of institution of the suit is not there, the question of maintenance does not arise at this stage and what is W.P.(C) No.2970/2008 2 required is a new wall to be constructed with a strong basement along EKJ line. Both the counsel appearing for the parties also submitted that it will bring a permanent solution to the litigation. Therefore, I dispose of the writ petition as follows: i) I direct the parties to file a compromise petition before the appellate court wherein the case is pending with a prayer to permit the parties to construct a compound wall along the EKJ line with a proper strong basement supervised by a Commissioner to be appointed by the court for the said purpose. ii) The parties shall bare the expenses in equal halves including the bata to be paid to the Commissioner and after construction of the same, within a stipulated period, the court can dispose of the appeal in the light of the settlement between the parties. iii) The court below is directed to consider the compromise petition, appoint a Commissioner direct him to execute the work to the satisfaction of the court and then dispose of the appeal, so that there will not be further litigation process between the brothers on this account. (M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE) ps