IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 8TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 19TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 8969 of 2006(P) ------------------------- PETITIONERS: ------------------ 1. SYAMALA, AGED 53, D/O.SANKARI, RESIDING AT SARATHCHANDRA GIRI, ANCAUD, KALLOOTH MURIYIL, THONNACKAL VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TALUK. 2. SOBHANA, AGED 47, D/O.SANKARI, RESIDING AT DO. DO. BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP SRI.V.VIJULAL RESPONDENT: -------------------- THE SECRETARY, POTHENCAUD GRAMA PANCHAYATH. BY ADVS. SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR SRI.G.BIJU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 8969 of 2006(P) ------------------------------------- APPENDIX ---------------- PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS ------------------------------------ EXT.P1. COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED DATED 15.4.97 EXT.P2. COPY OF JUDGEMENT DATED 30.1.1993 IN OS 330/1990 OF LOWER COURT. RESPONDENT'S EHIBITS : NIL ----------------------------------- / TRUE COPY / P.A. TO JUDGE VK T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ----------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.8969 OF 2006 --------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 8th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioners are owners in possession of 12 cents of property comprised in re-survey No.137/12 of Melthonnackal Village. It is stated that some portion of the western side of the property was used as a pathway for easy conveyance of rubbles and sands for the renovation of the building situated in the property. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that when the renovation of the building was over, some occupants of the properties on the northern side wanted to use the said pathway on a permanent basis and they approached the Panchayat also in the matter. This compelled the father of the petitioner to file a suit as O.S.No.330/90 before the Munsiff Court, Attingal wherein by Exhibit P2 judgment, a permanent prohibitory injunction was granted against defendants 1 and 2 from trespassing into the plaint schedule property, constructing a road through the plaint schedule property or plying any vehicle through the plaint schedule property. The Panchayat was also restrained from W.P.(C)No.8969/06 -2- taking any action to construct a pathway or road through the property. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that ignoring the judgment and decree, the Panchayat allotted funds for development of the pathway which compelled the petitioner to file this Writ Petition. 4. This Court passed an interim order on 24.3.2006 to the effect that if the decree of which Exhibit P2 is the judgment, is still in force, the Panchayat will ensure that the same is obliged. 5. Only if the decree is varied in any manner known to law, the defendants therein will get any right. But it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the judgment has become final. In that view of the matter, the same is binding on the Panchayat and therefore the Panchayat cannot attempt to use any portion of the property of the petitioner as a pathway or a road. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Sd/-( T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) dsn True copy P.A. to Judge