IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2008 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 32220 of 2008(I) -------------------------- I.A.NO.4854/2008 IN OS.870/2008 of PRL.M.C., KOLLAM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. RUSHENDRA PRABHA, AGED 55 YEARS, W/O.AYYAPPAN SANKAR, SIVASAILAM, NEAR MANALIL TEMPLE, KUREEPUZHA CHERRY, KAVANADU P.O., KOLLAM WEST VILLAGE FROM SREESAILAM CUTCHERY WARD, KOLLAM. 2. MOHANAN NAIR, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O.THANKAPPAN PILLAI, SAGARAM, ANCHATHU JUNCTION, KUREEPUZHACHERRY KAVANADU P.O., KOLLAM WEST VILLAGE. 3. OSEELATH NIZAR AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, W/O.T.K.NIZAR, MANDIRAM, MANALIL NAGAR-55 KUREEPUZHACHERRY, KAVANADU P.O., KOLLAM WEST VILLAGE, FROM JAHASH MANZIL, THIRUMULLAVARAM P.O., KOLLAM, REP. BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SHIHABUDEEN, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL REHUMAN KUNJU, RESIDING AT MANDIRAM, MANALIL NAGAR-55, KUREEPUZHACHERRY, KAVANADU P.O. BY ADV. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- RAJENDRAN THAMPI, RESIDING AT PANAMOOTTIL HOUSE, ULIYAKOVILCHERRY, KOLLAM EAST VILLAGE, KOLLAM DIST. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.32220 of 2008 I -------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of November, 2008. JUDGMENT Heard counsel for petitioners. 2. Petitioners are the plaintiffs in O.S.No.870 of 2008 of Munsiff's Court, Kollam. That is a suit for prohibitory injunction to restrain respondent/defendant from interfering with the plaint D schedule pathway which according to the petitioners, has a width of four metres. Petitioners also applied for an order of interim injunction vide I.A.No.4854 of 2008. Learned counsel for petitioners states that an Advocate Commissioner inspected the properties and submitted the report on 20.10.2008 but, the same commissioner has been deputed by the court below to submit report after inspection of the properties with the assistance of the Surveyor. Now the case stands posted on 12.11.2008 for report. The apprehension of the petitioners is that since no interim order was passed on I.A.No.4854 of 2008, respondent may interfere with the plaint D schedule pathway. Learned counsel requests for some interim arrangement to preserve the condition of disputed pathway at least as reported by the commissioner in Ext.P5 report. 3. Going by the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Munsiff has not taken up I.A.No.4854 of 2008 for consideration. As such, I do not consider it proper to issue any interim order on that application in WP(C) No.32220/2008 2 this proceeding. However, considering the apprehension made by the petitioners, they can request the learned Munsiff to take up I.A.No.4854 of 2008 for consideration. It is also open to them to request the learned Munsiff to pass interim orders on that application. If any such request is made, learned Munsiff will consider that request in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the materials on record. With the above observation, this Writ Petition is closed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE. cks