IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2009 / 3RD ASHADHA 1931 FAO.No. 136 of 2009() --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 28/05/2009 IN IA.1477/08 & 630/09 IN AS.2/2005 of SUB COURT, PAYYANNUR OS.242/1999 of MUNSIFF COURT, PAYYANNUR .................... APPELLANTS 1. K.V.SREEDHARAN, S/O.T.V.K.NARAYANAN ACHARI,KUNHIMANGALAM AMSOM AND DESOM, KANNUR TALUK, KANNUR DIST. 2. T.K.V.KUNHIKANNAN, S/O.T.V.K.NARAYANAN ACHARI, KUNHIMANGALAM AMSOM AND DESOM, KANNUR TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. 3. K.V.LAKSHMIKUTTY, D/O.T.V.K.NARAYANAN ACHARI,SURABHI, NEAR CHELORA GOVT. HIGH SCHOOL, VARAM, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL V.MOHAMMED RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/COUNTER PETITIONERS 1. THE CHIEF SECRETARY,GOVERNMENT OF KERALA KERALA STATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, KERALA STATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KANNUR. 4. THE SECRETARY, KUNHIMANGALAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, KUNHIMANGALAM, KANNUR DIST. THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = F.A.O.No.136 of 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 24 th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT Heard both sides. 2. In this appeal filed under Order XLIII Rule 1 C.P.C, the appellants who are the legal representatives of the plaintiff in O.S.No.242 of 2009 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Payyannur challenge the common order passed by the Subordinate Court, Payyannur in I.A.No.477 of 2008 and 630 of 2009 in A.S.No.2 of 2005. 3. The aforesaid suit was one for recovery of possession on the strength of title with arrears of rent in respect of the plaint schedule property admeasuring 49¼ cents, wherein a Government Lower Primary School is being run presently by the 4th defendant, Panchayat namely Kunhimangalam Grama Panchayat. As per judgment and decree dated 30.9.04, the trial court dismissed the suit. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the trial court, the appellants preferred an appeal before the Subordinate Court, Payyannur as A.S.No.2 of 2005. Pending appeal, they filed I.A.No.1477/2008 for an interim F.A.O.No.136 of 2009 2 injunction alleging that the Panchayat is demolishing the said building and reconstructing the same. Initially the lower appellate court granted an interim injunction as prayed for. Subsequently, at the instance of the Panchayat which filed I.A.No.568 of 2008, the interim injunction was modified allowing the Panchayat to effect repairs to the buildings which were stated to be under a high degree of dilapidation. Alleging that under the guise of repairs, the panchayat is resorting to demolition of the existing building, the appellant filed I.A.No.630 of 2009. The said application was resisted by the 4th defendant contending, inter alia, that the work which was being done was only to replace the wall made of mud bricks etc. so as to restore that portion of the building to the original condition to avert any collapse of the building where students were studying. The lower appellate court as per impugned order, accepted the said contention of the Grama Panchayat and dismissed I.A.No.1477 of 2008 as well as 630 of 2009. It is the said common order which is assailed in this appeal by the legal representatives of the plaintiff. 4. It is too early to consider the merits of the rival contentions regarding the alleged demolition, re-construction F.A.O.No.136 of 2009 3 etc. of the buildings in the suit property. Suffice it to say that the lower appellate court on the materials before it including the report of the Commissioner was satisfied that the work already done was only to avert the collapse of the building which has reached a high degree of dilapidation. Such being the position it cannot be said that the impugned order is unsustainable so as to warrant admission of this appeal. As mentioned earlier, the suit itself is for recovery of possession on the strength of title and the appellants will have to concentrate on the appeal filed before the lower appellate court pending as A.S.No.2 of 2005. Considering the fact that the appeal is of the year 2005, interests of justice require that the said appeal itself is disposed of expeditiously. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed with a direction to the Sub Court, Payyannur to dispose of A.S.No.2 of 2005 expeditiously and at any rate within a period of 8 months of the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Dated this the 24 th day of June, 2009. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE sj