IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 8TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 23166 of 2009(O) --------------------------------------- CMA.1/2009 of SUB COURT, PERUMBAVOOR OS.242/2008 of MUNSIFF COURT, PERUMBAVOOR .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- MOHANAN,S/O.NARAYANAN,MORAKKATTUMOLATH HOUSE(PUTHENVEEDU),VADAVUCODE KARA,VADAVUCODE VILLAGE, P.O.VADAVUCODE,KUNNATHUNADU TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.DINESH R.SHENOY RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------------- 1. SEETHA DEVI,D/O.GOVINDAN NAIR, MOTHAYIKKARA HOUSE(KRISHNA NIVAS),VAAVUCODE KARA, VADAVUCODE VILLAGE,VADAVUCODE.P.O,KUNNATHUNAD TALUK. 2. M.K.VINOD,S/O.KESAVAN NAIR, -DO- -DO- 3. M.K.GOVINDAN NAIR,S/O.NARAYANA PILLAI, -DO- -DO- 4. THULASI AMMA,W/O.GOVINDAN NAIR, -DO- -DO- 5. G.KRISHNAKUMAR,S/O.GOVINDAN NAIR, -DO- -DO- 6. AMBIKA DEVI,F/O.GOVINDAN NAIR, -DO- -DO- 7. THAMPI,S/O.MATHAI,CHOVVATTEL HOUSE, VADAVUCODE KARA,VADAVUCODE VILLAGE,VADAVUCODE.PO, KUNNATHUNAD TALUK. W.P.(C) NO.23166/2009 8. KARTHIKA AYYAPPAN,W/O.AYYAPPAN(L), MORAKKATTUMOLATH HOUSE,VADAVUCODE KARA,VADAVUCODE VILLAGE, P.O.VADAVUCODE,KUNNATHUNADU TALUK. 9. REMANI,D/O.AYYAPPAN,-DO- -DO- 10. AMMINI,D/O.AYYAPPAN, -DO- -DO- 11. THANKAMMA,D/O.AYYAPPAN, -DO- -DO- 12. THANKAPPAN,S/O.AYYAPPAN, -DO- -DO- 13. SINDHU,D/O.AYYAPPAN, -DO- -DO- 14. SREEKALA,D/O.AYYAPPAN,MORAKKATTUMOLATH HOUSE(PUTHENVEEDU),VADAVUCODE KARA,VADAVUCODE VILLAGE,P.O.VADAVUCODE,KUNNATHUNADU TALUK. R1 TO R7 BY ADV. MR.M.CHATHUKUTTY NAMBIAR R8 TO R14 BY ADV.MR.A.JOSEPH GEORGE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------- W.P.(C).No.23166 OF 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of September 2009 ------------------------------------- JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs. i) Issue a writ of certiorari or such other appropriate writ, order or direction setting aside Ext.P1 judgment of the Sub Court, Perumbavoor in CMA No.1/2009 and Ext.P15 order passed by the Munsiff Court, Perumbavoor and allow I.A No.1987/2008 and I.A No.1988/2008 as prayed for. ii) Grant such other reliefs as are deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. Petitioners are the plaintiffs in O.S No.242 of 2008 on the file of Munsiff Court, Perumbavoor. Suit is for declaration of right of prescriptive easement of the plaintiffs over 'E' W.P.(C).No.23166 OF 2009 Page numbers schedule property and for injunction. With the suit, the plaintiffs moved an application for interim injunction which after hearing both sides was dismissed by the learned Munsiff. The plaintiffs had also moved an application for mandatory injunction alleging that 'E' schedule pathway had been blocked by the respondents stocking granite stones. That application was also considered along with the application for interim injunction and by a common order both the petitions were dismissed. Petitioner has preferred an appeal before the Sub Court, Perumbavoor challenging the orders passed by the learned Munsiff. The learned Sub Judge concurred with the views taken by the learned Munsiff and upheld the dismissal of both the applications for injunction. Challenge raised in the writ petition is against the concurrent findings entered by the two courts below holding that the petitioners are not entitled to the discretionary relief sought for in their petitions. W.P.(C).No.23166 OF 2009 Page numbers 3. I heard the counsel on both sides. At the time of hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner taking note of the limits within which the visitorial jurisdiction of this court can be canvassed to examine the correctness and propriety of the concurrent findings made by the two courts below confined his submissions to seek for the issue of directions/orders to the court below for an expeditious disposal of the suit submitting that 'E' schedule pathway is the only pathway available to the petitioners for ingress and egress to their properties. That pathway, it is submitted is blocked by the respondents/defendants. The learned counsel submitted that the plaintiffs intend to file an amendment application and a direction may be issued to the court below to consider it on its merits irrespective of its directions/orders for expeditious disposal of the suit. Though the time limit is fixed for the disposal of the suit, I make it clear, if any application is filed by the W.P.(C).No.23166 OF 2009 Page numbers plaintiffs to amend the pleadings, which is found necessary to sustain the reliefs claimed in the suit, the court below after hearing both sides shall dispose it on its merits. Having regard to the submissions made and taking note of the facts and circumstances presented, I direct the learned Munsiff to give top priority for the trial of the suit and complete the pretrial steps expeditiously as possible and dispose the suit at any rate within a period of six months, but, after affording reasonable opportunity to both sides to lead evidence in support of their respective case. Send a copy of the judgment to the court concerned forthwith. The writ petition is disposed. Sd/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE vdv